NDA Report no. NDA/RWMD/013
Geological Disposal
Steps towards implementation
March 2010
NDA Report no. NDA/RWMD/013
Geological Disposal
Steps towards implementation
March 2010
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
CONDITIONS OF PUBLICATION
This report is made available under the NDA Transparency Policy. In line with this policy,
the NDA is seeking to make information on its activities readily available, and to enable
interested parties to have access to, and influence on, its future programmes. The report
may be freely used for non-commercial purposes. However, all commercial uses,
including copying and re-publication, require permission from the NDA. All copyright,
database rights and other intellectual property rights reside with the NDA. Applications
for permission to use the report commercially should be made to the NDA Information
Manager.
Although great care has been taken to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the
information contained in this publication, the NDA cannot assume any responsibility for
consequences that may arise from its use by other parties.
© Nuclear Decommissioning Authority 2010. All rights reserved.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
If you would like to see other reports available from NDA, a complete listing can be
viewed at our website www.nda.gov.uk, or please write to the Library at the address
below.
FEEDBACK
Readers are invited to provide feedback to the NDA on the contents, clarity and
presentation of this report and on the means of improving the range of NDA reports
published. Feedback should be addressed to:
John Dalton,
Head of Communications,
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (Radioactive Waste Management Directorate),
Building 587,
Curie Avenue,
Harwell Campus,
Didcot,
Oxon,
OX11 0RH, UK
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Executive summary
Introduction
Our Radioactive Waste Management Directorate (RWMD) is responsible for managing the
delivery of geological disposal for higher activity radioactive wastes, as required under UK
Government policy. This policy also states that the siting of a geological disposal facility will
be based on a voluntarism and partnership approach.
In this summary of our published report (Geological Disposal – Steps towards
implementation) we describe the preparatory work that we have undertaken so far,
including the planning of our future work programme and the management arrangements to
deliver it. This report is intended to provide information to a wide range of interested parties
on the steps we believe will be required for successful implementation of geological
disposal. It will also explain how the various activities and outputs of our work programme
are designed to achieve a safe, secure, sustainable and publicly acceptable outcome.
As the development of the implementation programme is at an early stage there are
inevitably many uncertainties; these are outlined in the report and explanations given of
how they are accommodated in our planning. It will be some time before a site is selected,
but while this is happening we need to develop plans, with the support of others, as to how
we ultimately will deal with the waste and get it safely underground.
In this report, we consider what we currently know or those things we currently assume
which are important in planning the development of a geological disposal facility, including
in particular:
•
the amount of radioactive waste requiring geological disposal;
•
the types of rock that potentially could host a facility; and
•
the potential geological disposal concepts.
The radioactive waste
Our first consideration is the amount of waste that needs disposal. The Managing
Radioactive Waste Safely (MRWS) White Paper sets out what is known as the Baseline
Inventory of the higher activity radioactive waste that is a legacy from nuclear activities that
have been undertaken or committed to up to now. This includes radioactive materials which
have not yet been classified as waste, such as spent nuclear fuel from power stations
which has not been reprocessed; plutonium and uranium extracted from spent fuel that has
been reprocessed; and uranium from the nuclear fuel manufacturing process.
A programme to build new nuclear power stations would produce more waste for disposal.
The Government believes it is technically possible and desirable to dispose of both new
and legacy wastes in the same geological disposal facilities. We have carried out technical
assessments of the disposability of the new wastes that would be produced that support
this view.
The geology
Based on the research that we and others have undertaken in the past three decades or
so, we believe that there is geology in the UK that is suitable to host a geological disposal
facility. For our preparatory work we have considered three broad (generic) host-rock types.
This helps us explore potential conceptual designs for a facility in any of these rock types.
i
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
These rock types are:
Higher strength rocks: These rocks, for example granite, themselves generally have a very
low permeability to water flow so that any water flow that does occur is in open cracks, or
fractures, that have formed in the rock mass. This type of rock is planned to be used in
Finland and Sweden at the sites chosen for their geological disposal facilities for spent
nuclear fuel.
Lower strength sedimentary rocks: These rocks are generally physically uniform and any
flow of water occurs through the overall rock mass. The Swiss Opalinus Clay geological
disposal concept is designed for this type of rock.
Evaporites: These rocks, for example rock salt, may contain water that has been trapped
within them ever since they were formed, but they are isolated from water flow that could
dissolve them. In the USA this type of rock is used for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant,
where waste has been disposed of for more than a decade, in New Mexico; Germany has
also developed a concept for this type of rock.
Multi-barrier approach to geological disposal
A range of generic geological disposal concepts is available that can provide safe and
secure geological disposal of higher activity wastes for each of the potentially suitable UK
geological settings identified above. Typically a different range of disposal concepts needs
to be considered in relation to different geological settings. However, each concept will
utilise a ‘multi barrier’ approach.
This approach involves engineered and natural barriers working together to prevent
radioactivity being released to the surface in amounts that could cause harm to life and the
environment. It works as follows:
The waste form: This is the form into which the waste is conditioned to make it suitable for
disposal. This form might be chosen so that it is very resistant to the leaching of
radionuclides by groundwater, as in the example of converting high-level waste into a glass
waste form.
The waste container: The conditioned waste is placed in a container, creating what is
referred to as the waste package. The container is constructed to have sufficient strength
and corrosion resistance that the waste will be safely contained during its initial, interim
storage and its eventual transport to the geological disposal facility and transfer
underground. The material and design of the container can be chosen to subsequently
provide reliable physical containment under disposal conditions for extended periods of
time.
The buffer or backfill: When waste packages have been placed underground in a disposal
facility, at an appropriate stage according to the design and taking account of societal
considerations of retrievability, they will be surrounded with buffer or backfill materials. In
addition to providing physical support for the waste packages, the buffer or backfill can be
designed to provide qualities such as physical and/or chemical protection of the waste
container, and physical and/or chemical controls on the migration of radionuclides away
from the waste packages.
Mass backfill: In addition to the buffer or backfill around the waste containers, all access
tunnels and shafts will be filled in with mass backfill, prior to closure of the facility. The
mass backfill might simply be required to ensure other engineered barriers are retained in
place but could also be designed to control groundwater flow.
ii
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Sealing Systems: Engineered seals will be used to prevent the flow of fluids in the
excavated tunnels. Seals may also be used where appropriate on parts of the rock that are
more permeable.
Geology: The rock formations themselves will act as a barrier in a number of ways that
could include limiting the flow of groundwater or of any gas released from the waste
packages, limiting the movement of radionuclides towards the ground surface, and
protecting the wastes deep underground from extreme changes (human or natural) that
may take place on the Earth's surface.
Phases of work in our programme for implementing a geological disposal facility
We have defined a number of phases in our programme of work for successful
implementation of a geological disposal facility that run from its initial planning through to its
closure and beyond. The earlier phases are aligned to the stages of the site selection
process set out in the UK Government's MRWS White Paper.
Preparatory Studies Phase: This is the current phase of our work and it coincides with the
UK Government's MRWS Stages 1 to 4 of the site selection process. Purely as a planning
assumption we assume that this phase will be about five years in duration. Our work
supports the UK Government and communities who have expressed an interest in
participating in the site selection process. We are developing conceptual facility designs
and the safety and environmental assessments for those designs. Areas deemed
unsuitable following screening by the British Geological Survey will be ruled out during this
phase. Communities with potentially suitable sites may opt to move to a decision to
participate in the site selection process although they will continue to have a right of
withdrawal until construction is about to begin, just before the construction and
underground investigations stage. On behalf of the UK Government, we will work with the
communities who take a decision to participate to undertake desk-based studies of any
candidate sites identified in their areas. The studies will inform decisions about proceeding
to the next stage in the site selection process.
Surface Based Investigations Phase: This phase of our work coincides with the UK
Government’s MRWS Stage 5 of the site selection process. If communities decide to
proceed, the UK Government will agree candidate sites for surface-based investigations.
At this time we will need to obtain the necessary environmental permits and planning
permission to carry out borehole drilling to investigate the geology more closely. A
monitoring programme for the geology during the entire life of the project will also be
established at this time. We currently assume this phase will take about ten years to
complete and ultimately will help inform UK Government's decision on a preferred site. We
will work closely during this phase with the Community Siting Partnership that the UK
Government expects will be set up in communities who take a decision to participate.
Construction and Underground Based Investigations Phase: This phase will begin once the
UK Government has decided on a preferred site in accordance with the MRWS process.
This phase of our work coincides with the beginning of UK Government’s MRWS Stage 6 of
the site selection process. For planning purposes we assume that this decision could be
made around 2025 and is fully dependant on the outcome of discussions between the UK
Government and the local community. Following this, we will seek planning and regulatory
permissions. Procurement and contractual arrangements for construction of the facility will
be finalised. We will undertake long-term investigations from underground to confirm the
site is suitable. We will work closely with the regulators and once planning permission is
given, construction and investigations from underground will begin. Tunnels and vaults for
the waste will be excavated and surface facilities built. If UK Government and the
iii
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
regulators have been satisfied that the programme should proceed following the
underground-based investigations, the required permissions and authorisations will be
sought to operate the disposal facility. We currently assume that this phase will take about
15 years to complete.
Operation Phase: For planning purposes this phase is assumed to begin around 2040. It
would continue until all the waste designated for disposal in the facility had been placed
underground, assuming that the UK Government and regulators remained satisfied with the
safety of the disposal facility and in particular that it would provide a sufficient level of
containment. There will be a rigorous system of checking all waste packages sent to the
facility for disposal. The system for transporting radioactive wastes from the sites where it is
stored to the disposal facility will be developed to minimise potential environmental impacts
and will be designed to operate in a safe and efficient manner.
Closure Phase: The decision on when to close the facility after all of the waste has been
placed underground for final disposal will take into consideration the views of the local
community. Leading up to closure of the underground facilities, disposal vaults and
deposition tunnels will have been backfilled, the underground openings sealed and the
access ways backfilled and closed. It is anticipated this step will take about ten years.
Records from the geological disposal facility will be placed in a national archive and any
permanent marking for the site will be agreed by the UK Government, the regulators and
the local community. A period of post-closure monitoring could be undertaken by the
authority responsible for institutional control of the site.
Schedule for gaining permissions
We are working with the UK Government and regulators to develop a schedule that is
consistent with the policy commitments set out in the MRWS White Paper. Currently the
schedule describes the proposed process that we plan to follow when the time comes to
seek the required permissions, rather than being a timetable for such applications to be
submitted.
Engaging and communicating with the public and stakeholders
We cannot do this alone. The implementation of the geological disposal programme will
proceed in partnership with other organisations. Amongst the most important of these are
UK Government, local decision making bodies, Community Siting Partnership, regulatory
bodies and current and prospective waste producers.
Our work involves sharing information and learning through feedback we receive from
others. Following consultations, we have developed and published a public and
stakeholder engagement strategy that outlines the aims and objectives of the strategy and
how we propose to engage and communicate with stakeholders about our work programme
on geological disposal.
Costs
The current estimate of the NDA’s share of the cost for the geological disposal programme
for currently identified wastes and spent fuel is £3.7 billion using the UK Government’s
discounting method, or about £12 billion without discounting. We have estimated a further
cost of about £2 billion, without discounting, for the inclusion of existing stocks of separated
plutonium and uranium if it were required to dispose of these materials.
iv
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 Scope
3 Waste inventory
3.1 Waste from new nuclear power stations
4 Geology
5 Geological disposal concepts
5.1 Multi-barrier containment
6 Reference case programme
6.1 Reference conceptual design
6.2 Interim surface storage and timing for disposal
6.3 Disposability assessments and costing studies
6.4 Generic transport system
7 Phases of work in the Geological Disposal Programme
7.1 Preparatory Studies Phase
7.2 Surface Based Investigation Phase
7.3 Construction and Underground Based Investigation Phase
7.4 Operation Phase
7.5 Closure Phase
8 Regulatory requirements
8.1 The Permissions Schedule
8.2 Future documents
9 Working with other organisations
9.1 The UK Government
9.2 Community Siting Partnerships and decision making bodies
9.3 Site Licence Companies (SLCs)
9.4 Contribution to new nuclear-build Generic Design Assessment (GDA)
9.5 Contribution to Integrated Waste Strategy
9.6 International relations
9.6.1 Benchmarking
10 Engaging and communicating with the public and stakeholders
11 Cost
12 References
13 Acknowledgements
14 Annex 1 – List of Bilateral Agreements
v
1
6
7
10
12
15
17
22
22
24
25
25
27
28
35
38
41
42
44
45
46
47
47
47
47
49
49
49
50
51
53
55
58
59
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
1 Introduction
The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) has established the Radioactive Waste
Management Directorate (RWMD) to manage the delivery of geological disposal for
higher activity wastes, as required under UK Government policy published in the
Managing Radioactive Waste Safely (MRWS) White Paper (Ref. 1). The purpose of this
report is to describe the preparatory work that we in RWMD are undertaking in planning
our future work programme and the management arrangements that we will need to
deliver that programme.
We hope that this report will provide useful information for a wide range of stakeholders
and interested individuals. We have tried to write the report so that the reader will not
require a detailed knowledge of the science and technology of radioactive waste
management. We want to explain the current status of our planning for geological
disposal and how the various activities and outputs of our work programme are designed
to achieve a safe, secure, sustainable and publicly acceptable outcome. As the
development of the implementation programme is at a very early stage there are
inevitably many uncertainties; these are outlined in the report and explanations are given
of how we deal with them in our planning.
As the implementation programme progresses some of the uncertainties that we have to
deal with will be resolved and our planning will not rely so heavily on assumptions such
as we have to make at present. Therefore we expect to publish new versions of this
report at appropriate points in the programme to reflect significant developments in the
status of our planning as firmer information becomes available and key decisions are
made.
This approach was set out in Paragraph 4.17 of the MRWS White Paper (Ref. 1):
“During the course of 2008-9, the NDA will undertake early planning for the
implementation of a geological disposal facility. This will include provision for a staged
implementation approach, with clear decision points, that allows design and development,
cost, affordability and value for money, safety, and environmental and sustainability
impacts to be reviewed at the end of each stage before a decision to move on to the next
stage is agreed with Government. This planning will be progressively refined and costed
as the implementation programme proceeds.”
This report describes how the early planning has progressed since publication of the
MRWS White Paper. In particular we want to explain how we plan to support the MRWS
site selection process, how we plan to develop into an effective delivery organisation and
how technical activities and supporting research are likely to be progressed. This report is
not intended to present a plan for implementing geological disposal, however we are
progressing the development of provisional implementation plans for our internal use in
managing the geological disposal programme.
UK Government policy is that geological disposal is the way higher activity radioactive
waste will be managed in the long term: this will be preceded by safe and secure interim
storage until a geological disposal facility can receive waste. The NDA also has
responsibility for the safe and secure storage of its waste. This responsibility is
discharged by other parts of the NDA and is not discussed in this report. In our work we
do take full account of storage arrangements for higher activity wastes and also try to
ensure optimised solutions for the management of higher activity wastes and nuclear
materials through coordination with the relevant activities in the NDA’s work programme.
1
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
The definition of geological disposal given by the UK Government’s advisory Committee
on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) in its recommendations to UK
Government in 2006 (Ref. 2) has been followed through in the UK Government response
to those recommendations (Ref. 3) and in the MRWS White Paper. This is “burial
underground (200-1,000m) of radioactive waste in a purpose built facility with no intention
to retrieve….” This definition applies to all references to geological disposal made in this
report.
In the MRWS White Paper, the UK Government considers the issue of retrievability of
waste in a geological disposal facility. It notes that decisions about whether or not to keep
a facility (or vaults within it) open once operations cease can be made at a later date in
discussion with the regulators and local communities and that in the meantime the
planning, design and construction of a facility can be carried out in such a way that the
option of retrievability is not excluded. This is taken into account in the planning outlined
in this report.
Prior to issuing the MRWS White Paper the UK Government consulted on its framework
for implementing geological disposal. Following this, the Government set out that it
remained of the view that it formed in responding to CoRWM’s 2006 recommendations,
that geological disposal and an approach based on voluntarism and partnership as a
means of siting a facility is the right way forward. The MRWS White Paper states that
during the early stages of the process there will be two key local decision points, defined
in the White Paper as:
•
Expression of Interest – the decision point at which local communities register
their without commitment interest in discussions with the UK Government about
potential involvement in the siting process.
•
Decision to Participate – the decision point at which a Decision Making Body
(ies) makes a formal commitment to participate in the geological disposal facility
siting process, but without commitment to host the facility.
The MRWS White Paper sets out that the site selection process will be conducted in
parallel with discussions between the UK Government, the NDA and a local community
from the point at which a community has made an Expression of Interest to open up
discussions with the UK Government. The invitation to make an Expression of Interest
was included in the MRWS White Paper. The MRWS site selection process will progress
in stages, allowing all those involved to take stock before deciding whether or not to move
to the next stage at a particular site. It is represented diagrammatically in Figure 1.1.
Overall both the policy and the process are markedly different from those pursued
previously. The policy covers all higher activity wastes and nuclear materials potentially
requiring geological disposal, rather than just one category of wastes (intermediate-level
waste). The siting process now rests on decisions on involvement and participation by
local communities, rather than on the generation of siting proposals by a waste
management organisation acting in concert with central Government.
2
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Figure 1.1: Stages in the MRWS site selection process
As noted in the MRWS White Paper, the NDA has established a new Radioactive Waste
Management Directorate (RWMD), incorporating expertise and information from the
former United Kingdom Nirex Limited, which it will develop into an effective delivery
organisation for geological disposal. In due course, ownership of the organisation could
then be opened up to competition in line with the arrangements for operators of NDA
sites. For the remainder of this report RWMD and its possible successor organisations
will be referred to as “we” and the use of “NDA” will refer to the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority as a whole, being the organisation which has responsibility for managing the
UK’s civil nuclear legacy and that owns much of the legacy higher activity waste in the
UK.
Our stated mission is, “To deliver a geological disposal facility and provide radioactive
waste management solutions.” Our objectives are as follows:
•
Engage with national and local governments and communities to identify a
geological disposal facility site.
•
Develop the specification, design, safety case and environmental and
sustainability assessments for the disposal system and obtain regulatory support.
•
In conjunction with waste producers, identify and deliver solutions to optimise the
management of higher activity waste.
•
Develop and maintain an effective organisation and secure resources to deliver
the geological disposal facility programme.
3
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
•
Obtain and maintain stakeholder support for our activities.
•
Deliver a focused R&D programme to support geological disposal and optimised
packaging solutions.
•
Seek sustainable, innovative and cost effective solutions that have public support
and are in the best interest of the UK.
This report explains how we are delivering these objectives at the current stage of our
programme.
We will work with a number of organisations to implement geological disposal. This is
recognised in relevant parts of the report but the work of these organisations is not
presented in detail. Paragraph 2.3 of the MRWS White Paper identifies the key roles and
responsibilities for implementing geological disposal as follows:
•
Government is responsible for the policy, will take final decisions and engage with
stakeholders to ensure that the objectives of the MRWS programme are met.
•
The NDA is the implementing organisation, responsible for planning and
delivering the geological disposal facility and, as part of this process, will engage
with communities and other stakeholders. NDA already provides interim storage of
waste on its sites and will continue to do so for as long as it takes to site and
construct a geological disposal facility. The NDA will also undertake a programme
of research and development to support optimised delivery of geological disposal
and interim storage.
•
Communities with a potential interest in hosting a geological disposal facility will
have the opportunity to work with the NDA and others in a partnership approach
during the process.
•
Local government will be fully engaged in a partnership approach and will play a
part in local decision-making during the site selection process.
•
Independent regulators will ensure robust, independent regulation in relation to
statutory responsibilities for ensuring that national, European Union and
international safety, security and environmental legislation and standards are met.
•
Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) will provide
independent scrutiny and advice to Government on the plans and programmes for
delivering geological disposal including interim storage.
Currently the UK Government Department having responsibility for policy is the
Department for Environment and Climate Change (DECC).
The MRWS White Paper envisages that communities and local government will engage
with the site selection process through a Community Siting Partnership (CSP). Following
Expressions of Interest by local authorities in the area, a West Cumbria MRWS
Partnership has been established to lead its local community engagement with the siting
process. If the process continues in this area to the later stage of identifying one or more
4
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
candidate sites for assessment, it is envisaged that a CSP will be established and be
central to the agreement of such sites with DECC.
For reasons explained later in this report there are now, and will remain for some time,
significant uncertainty about the final waste inventory that will require geological disposal.
Paragraph 3.22 of the MRWS White Paper recognises that mechanisms will have to be
agreed for updating the disposal inventory in discussion with local communities as the
programme proceeds. We expect this to be an important area for early engagement
between a CSP and DECC, where we would provide technical information and advice as
appropriate.
5
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
2 Scope
The next sections of the report describe:
•
the radioactive wastes and materials that may require geological disposal;
•
geological settings that are potentially suitable to host a geological disposal
facility;
•
the development of a range of geological disposal concepts that would be
appropriate for the disposal of the different types of radioactive wastes and
materials in the various types of rock considered suitable;
•
the use of a reference case as a basis for planning assumptions and as a
benchmark for provision of information;
•
the phases of work comprising our overall geological disposal programme;
•
how we identify and aim to meet the relevant regulatory requirements;
•
the main organisations that we will work with to deliver geological disposal and
the nature of our relationships with those organisations;
•
how we communicate and engage with the public and stakeholders, and how we
aim to develop this part of our programme; and
•
the costs of geological disposal.
Section 5 of the report describes how we are using a subset of the range of geological
disposal concepts that we are investigating to provide the basis for assessments of the
safety of a geological disposal facility during its construction and operation and in the
long-term, after its closure. We use the same subset of concepts as the basis for
assessments of the potential environmental, social and economic impacts of developing a
facility and for assessments of the costs of its development, construction, operation and
closure.
The current use of reference concepts as a planning basis for project costs, resource
requirements and programming is explained in Section 6. The main assumptions behind
the lifetime cost figures presented in NDA’s Annual Report and Accounts (Ref. 4) are
discussed to allow the figures to be put in context.
The report also explains (in Section 9) the links between these activities and the
assessments of the disposability of higher activity wastes conducted by RWMD in support
of the retrieval, conditioning and packaging of wastes by waste producers; this includes
discussion of the implications of potential new nuclear build.
In Section 7 there is a more detailed explanation of the activities that we believe will be
required over the next few years, covering site assessments and preparations for
surface-based site investigations, with a high level description of subsequent activities.
The report also outlines, in Section 7, our plans to develop into the organisation
responsible for the delivery of the geological disposal facility, as required in the MRWS
White Paper.
In parallel with this report we are working on more detailed plans to inform the decisions
that have to be made by the UK Government and the NDA on funding the geological
disposal programme.
6
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
3 Waste inventory
The MRWS White Paper defines the radioactive wastes to be managed in the long-term
through geological disposal as those that:
•
cannot be managed under the Policy for the Long-term Management of Solid
Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLW) in the United Kingdom (Ref. 5) - the "LLW
Policy"; and
•
are not managed under the Scottish government's developing policy for higher
activity waste, currently interim, near-surface, near-site storage.
This higher activity waste comprises principally high-level waste (HLW) and intermediatelevel waste (ILW) and includes also the small fraction of LLW that cannot be managed
under the LLW Policy. The MRWS White Paper gives definitions and descriptions of
these categories of wastes. Fuller descriptions and an account of the processes that
generate the wastes can be found in Reference 6.
Figure 3.1:
Typical items of low-level waste
Figure 3.2:
Steel drum of cement-encapsulated intermediate-level waste
7
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Figure 3.3:
Vitrified high-level waste
In addition to these wastes, there are some radioactive materials that are not currently
classified as waste, but may need to be managed through geological disposal if they
came to be considered as waste in the future. These include spent fuel discharged from
nuclear power reactors that is not currently destined to be reprocessed to extract uranium
and plutonium; plutonium separated from spent fuel that has been reprocessed; and
separated uranium that comes mainly from the manufacture of nuclear fuel and from the
reprocessing of spent fuel.
Information on the sources, quantities and properties of UK radioactive waste holdings is
published in the UK Radioactive Waste Inventory (UKRWI), which is currently updated
every three years. The latest version (the "2007 UKRWI") for a waste holdings stock date
of 1 April 2007 was published jointly by the Department of the Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs (Defra) and NDA in June 2008 (Ref. 7). For the first time this version
contains information on radioactive materials not currently classified as waste, but some
of which could come to be considered as waste in the future.
The Baseline Inventory of higher activity wastes for geological disposal comprises the
total amounts of the relevant radioactive wastes and other materials that could, possibly
come to be regarded as waste in the future. It was developed using information from the
2007 UKRWI and published in the MRWS White Paper, as shown in Table 3.1 below.
8
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Table 3.1:
The MRWS White Paper Baseline Inventory
Notes:
1. Quantities of radioactive materials and wastes are consistent with the 2007 UK Radioactive
Waste Inventory.
2. Packaging assumptions for HLW, ILW and LLW not suitable for disposal at the existing low-level
waste repository (LLWR) are taken from the 2007 UKRWI. Note that they may change in the
future.
3. The HLW packaged volume may increase when the facility for disposing the canisters, in which
the vitrified HLW is currently stored, has been implemented.
4. Packaging assumptions for plutonium, uranium and spent nuclear fuel are taken from the 2005
CoRWM Baseline Inventory (Ref. 8). Note that they may change in the future.
5. Radioactive data for wastes and materials was derived using the 2007 UK Radioactive Waste
Inventory. 2040 is the assumed start date for the geological disposal facility.
6. It should be noted that at present the Baseline Inventory is based on UK Inventory figures, and
as such, currently contains waste expected to be managed under the Scottish government’s policy
of interim near-surface, near-site storage as announced on 25 June 2007 (Ref. 9)
9
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
The UK Government’s policy (paragraph 3.8 in the MRWS White Paper) is that, pending
a decision whether the radioactive materials included in the Baseline Inventory should be
declared as waste, we will factor their possible inclusion into the design and development
of the geological disposal facility. Therefore we use for planning purposes the Baseline
Inventory as the basis for developing a disposal system specification and, in turn,
geological disposal facility engineering designs that meet this specification. These facility
designs in turn provide the basis for assessments of the associated safety and
environmental, social and economic impacts and for assessments of costs.
We recognise that the higher-activity wastes to be managed in the long term through
geological disposal will exclude any that are managed under the Scottish government's
policy for higher-activity waste. However, as noted in the MRWS White Paper, these
wastes are included in the Baseline Inventory and we are using that as the basis for our
disposal system specification, design and assessment work.
There are further sources of uncertainty in the eventual inventory requiring geological
disposal which are also covered by our work programme. These include uncertainties in
the volumes and radionuclide contents of the currently identified wastes and materials in
the Baseline Inventory and uncertainties in scenarios for the future operation of the
nuclear plants that produce these wastes and materials. We must also consider the
possible inclusion of spent fuel, plutonium and uranium owned by the Ministry of Defence
that are not currently within the Baseline Inventory.
We can create a range of scenarios for the inventory of wastes that may require
geological disposal in order to evaluate the implications of these uncertainties for the
geological disposal programme. In particular we have developed an “Upper Inventory” to
give an indication of the quantities that might need disposal. We want to be able to
demonstrate that a geological disposal facility can be developed to deal with this
inventory safely and securely in addition to being confident that the same will be true for a
lesser inventory. The Upper Inventory also provides visibility to local communities that are
considering participation in the site selection process of what might be involved in hosting
a geological disposal facility.
3.1 Waste from new nuclear power stations
The Baseline Inventory does not include radioactive waste arising from proposed new
nuclear build in the UK. The volume of such waste produced would depend on factors
such as the reactor type, number of new reactors and their operational life. The UK
Government considers that it would be technically possible, and desirable, to dispose of
any waste arising from new nuclear build in a geological disposal facility alongside legacy
waste and has committed to exploring this through the MRWS process.
We do not know the amounts of higher activity wastes that new build may produce. In
order to deal with this uncertainty we include a contribution of wastes from new build in
the Upper Inventory. This is so that we can assess the implications of wastes from this
source on geological disposal. In particular we want to be able to understand the
relationship between the amounts and nature of such wastes and the implications for the
size and design of a geological disposal facility and for the level of safety and
environmental protection provided by the facility.
Through the Generic Design Assessment process the nuclear regulators will assess the
safety, security and environmental impact of power station designs, including the
quantities and types of waste (gaseous, liquid and solid) that are likely to arise, their
suitability for storage and their disposability. We have contributed to this process by
10
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
assessing the disposability of higher activity wastes (where higher activity wastes include
spent nuclear fuel in the event that it came to be declared as a waste) that may arise from
new nuclear build against geological disposal facility design and safety considerations.
We have completed assessments for the wastes from two designs of reactors proposed
by so-called “requesting parties”:
•
the EPR (European Pressurised Water Reactor) proposed for the UK by EdF and
AREVA, who are jointly acting as a requesting party (Ref. 10);
•
the AP-1000 (Advanced Pressurised Water Reactor) proposed by Westinghouse
Electric Company LLC (Ref. 11).
We have concluded that compared with legacy waste and existing spent fuel, no new
issues arise that challenge the fundamental disposability of the wastes and spent fuel
expected to arise from operation of both designs of reactor. Fuel from new reactor
designs will be subject to higher “burn-up” than in existing UK reactors. This refers to the
extraction of more energy from the same amount of fuel, with the result that the spent fuel
is hotter and more radioactive. Our disposability assessments show that spent fuel with
such characteristics can be accommodated without adverse effects on the safety of a
suitably designed geological disposal facility.
The costs of geological disposal are discussed in Section 11, but it is important to note
that we also work out the cost impact of accommodating new build wastes and provide
UK Government with the information it requires to ensure that new build will pay its full
share.
11
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
4 Geology
The range of geological settings that could be suitable for hosting a geological disposal
facility for higher-activity radioactive wastes in the UK is wide and diverse. UK
Government policy is that the siting process for a geological disposal facility will be based
upon voluntarism and partnership. This means that any geological settings available for
the disposal facility will depend on the locations of sites identified through discussions
with local communities involved in the process.
Until such time as more specific information becomes available, the approach that we will
take is to define a limited number of generic geological settings, encompassing typical,
potentially suitable UK geologies. We are adopting this approach to provide a
manageable number of engineering design case studies and associated assessments of
safety and environmental, social and economic impacts and assessments of the costs to
develop a facility. In particular we want to be able to show the viability of disposal of the
UK’s higher activity wastes in a range of geological settings; we are developing a Generic
Disposal System Safety Case and Generic Strategic Environmental Assessment that will
present our assessments, which are discussed further in Section 7.
The geological settings that we have defined are based on consideration of the host rock
formation (where the disposal areas will be developed) and the cover rocks (the
geological formations that occur between the disposal areas and the ground surface). At
this stage in our programme we are using only coarse descriptions to distinguish different
geological settings. As information becomes available on candidate sites, at the
appropriate stages in the site selection process we will take into account more specific
information on the geological and hydrogeological characteristics that will be necessary
for the design and safety case for the geological disposal facility. We have chosen the
mechanical strength of the rock as the main distinguishing characteristic at this stage as,
along with the wastes requiring disposal, this has the most influence on the conceptual
design of the facility. This enables us to describe realistic concepts as examples of how
geological disposal could be implemented in each of these generic settings. The cover
rocks are very important in restricting the movement of radionuclides in groundwater out
of the disposal facility, potentially towards the surface environment, so cover rocks are
included in these coarse descriptions.
The use of generic geological settings does not imply that any specific sites are being
considered. The host rock descriptions correspond to three distinct general rock types
that are considered potentially suitable to host a disposal facility for higher activity
wastes, based on studies carried out in the UK and internationally, and which occur in the
UK. They are described as follows:
•
Higher strength rocks - these would typically comprise crystalline igneous,
metamorphic rocks or geologically older sedimentary rocks, where any fluid
movement is predominantly through divisions in the rock, often referred to as
discontinuities. Granite is a good example of a rock that would fall in this
category.
•
Lower strength sedimentary rocks - these would typically comprise geologically
younger sedimentary rocks where any fluid movement is predominantly through
the rock mass itself. Many types of clay are good examples of this category of
rocks.
12
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
•
Evaporites - these would typically comprise anhydrite (anhydrous calcium
sulphate), halite (rock salt) or other evaporites that result from the evaporation of
water from water bodies containing dissolved salts.
As a relatively simple explanation of the terms used in these descriptions, most bodies of
rock are not physically uniform (or continuous), but contain features such as pores or
fractures which resulted from the processes that first formed the rocks and, thereafter,
from the response of the rocks to various geological events. We call features such as
fractures, discontinuities.
In the absence of discontinuities, higher strength rocks typically have a very low
permeability to water flow. However, fractures may be present which, depending on their
properties, will allow water to flow more readily, and so the main water movement is
expected to be through these discontinuities rather than through the more uniform rock,
or “rock matrix”.
In lower strength sedimentary rocks, discontinuities are typically in the form of pores
which are relatively small in length and in aperture, and are evenly distributed through the
rock matrix. In this case the discontinuities do not represent a separate, easier path for
water flow and flow occurs through the uniform arrangement of particles of rock and the
pores between them.
Evaporites often contain water that was present at the time of their formation, but this is
trapped between the evaporite rock crystals. Evaporite rocks have been stable over
geological timescales and, in the absence of major geological changes, are effectively
isolated from flowing groundwater that would cause them to dissolve. Therefore
groundwater flow is not expected to occur through evaporites. Any flows of other fluids,
such as gas or any pressurised, trapped water from the time of the rock’s formation,
would require fissures to open up within the evaporite, which could then create
groundwater flow pathways.
The covering rocks included in the generic geological settings are:
•
Host rocks to surface - this means that the geological formation that comprises
the host rock extends from the level of waste emplacement to the ground
surface.
•
Sedimentary cover rocks - this means that there is a sequence of sedimentary
rocks overlying the host rock formation that have characteristics different from
those of the host rock formation.
The combinations of host and cover rocks that are considered are summarised in Table
4.1.
13
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Table 4.1:
Host and cover rocks
The setting of evaporite host rocks extending to the surface does not exist in the UK. The
rainfall that we receive is sufficient to ensure that rocks near the surface will be saturated
with groundwater. Evaporites would dissolve under these circumstances. In the UK, for
evaporites to persist and therefore be considered a potentially suitable host rock for
geological disposal of radioactive wastes they must be separated from the circulating
groundwater system close to the surface, typically by a cover rock having low
permeability to groundwater flow.
14
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
5 Geological disposal concepts
Selecting the most appropriate method for implementing geological disposal will require
us to carry out assessments and make decisions at different levels of detail. At the
current stage of the programme our work is focused on analysing and developing
potentially suitable geological disposal concepts. At later stages we will develop design
solutions to implement the concept or concepts that are then being considered.
As described later in this report, once specific candidate sites have been identified, we
will gather information on each site. This will enable us to identify and assess the possible
range of geological disposal concepts, taking account of the waste inventory for disposal,
which could be implemented at the site. In this way we aim to support a well-informed
selection of the concept or concepts that will be carried forward in the work programme
for the site. As the geological disposal programme progresses we will move from highlevel decisions on the concepts to be considered, to concept-specific and design
decisions on the range of materials to be considered and, eventually, to decisions on the
designs and materials to be used. Therefore we can only make meaningful selections of
concepts and design components when we have sufficient site-specific information.
A range of generic geological disposal concepts, being studied and developed in the UK
and internationally, could provide safe and secure geological disposal of higher activity
wastes for each of the potentially suitable UK geological settings identified in Section 4.
Typically a different range of disposal concepts needs to be considered in relation to each
different geological setting.
Previously a subset of internationally available geological disposal concepts was used to
demonstrate the general viability of geological disposal of radioactive wastes in the UK
(Ref. 12). In addition some specific disposal concepts have been worked up in more
detail to support the development of waste package specifications and the assessment of
the disposability of waste packages that would be produced as a result of proposals put
forward by waste owners (Ref. 13).
Work that we carried out in 2008 identified a range of possible concepts for geological
disposal of ILW/LLW (Ref. 14), and of HLW and spent fuel (Ref. 15), effectively providing
us with a catalogue of concepts for consideration. The work drew on previous work in the
UK, and disposal programmes in other countries, to identify disposal concepts for generic
geological settings (host rock formations and associated geological and hydrogeological
conditions).
At the current stage of the programme we are examining a wide range of potentially
suitable disposal concepts so that a well-informed assessment of options can be carried
out at appropriate decision points in the implementation programme. Drawing from this
work we have set out illustrative concepts for each of the three generic geological
settings, including the associated variants on overlying rocks.
We are using these illustrative concepts to:
•
further develop our understanding of the functional and technical requirements of
the disposal system;
•
further develop our understanding of the design requirements;
•
support the scoping and assessment of the safety, environmental, social and
economic impacts of a geological disposal facility;
15
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
•
support development and prioritisation of our R&D programme;
•
underpin our analysis of the potential cost of geological disposal; and
•
support assessment of the disposability of waste packages proposed by waste
owners.
We have set out the illustrative concepts solely for these purposes. We do not intend that
one of these illustrative concepts is necessarily the one that we would use in the relevant
geological setting. At this stage, no geological disposal concept has been ruled out.
We selected the illustrative geological disposal concepts following consideration of the
concepts identified in the studies of disposal concepts for ILW/LLW (Ref. 14) and for
HLW and spent fuel (Ref. 15). We selected concepts that are well-developed and
supported by extensive research and development, allow for ease of retrieval, and have
been subject to detailed safety assessment, regulatory scrutiny and international review
(Ref. 16). Currently we assume that the disposal concepts for ILW/LLW will be potentially
suitable for the geological disposal of uranium residues in the Baseline Inventory and that
the disposal concepts for HLW and spent fuel will be potentially suitable for the geological
disposal of the separated plutonium and highly enriched uranium in the Baseline
Inventory.
The illustrative concepts are listed in Table 5.1 and the attached notes present the key
reasons why these examples were selected. The key features of each of these examples
are shown in Figures 5.1 – 5.5.
Table 5.1:
Illustrative disposal concept examples
Notes:
(a) Higher strength rocks – the UK ILW/LLW concept and KBS-3V concept for spent fuel were
selected due to the availability of information on these concepts for the UK context.
(b) Lower strength sedimentary rocks – the Opalinus Clay concept for disposal of long-lived ILW,
HLW and spent fuel was selected because a recent OECD Nuclear Energy Agency review
regarded the Nagra (Switzerland) assessment of the concept as state of the art with respect to the
level of knowledge available. However, it should be noted that there is similarly extensive
information available for a concept that has been developed for implementation in Callovo
Oxfordian Clay by Andra (France), and which has also been accorded strong endorsement from
international peer review. Although we will use the Opalinus Clay concept as the basis of the
illustrative example, we will also draw on information from the Andra programme. In addition, we
will draw on information from the Belgian super container concept, based on disposal of HLW and
spent fuel in Boom Clay.
16
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
(c) Evaporites – the concept for the disposal of transuranic wastes (TRU) (long-lived ILW) in a
bedded salt host rock at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico, USA was selected
because of the wealth of information available from this licensed, operating facility. The concept for
disposal of HLW and spent fuel in a salt dome host rock developed by DBE Technology
(Germany) was selected due to the level of concept information available.
5.1 Multi-barrier containment
All of these illustrative concepts are based on the principle of multiple barrier containment
of the radioactivity in the wastes. This involves developing a combination of engineered
barriers that will complement the natural barrier provided by the geology at the site.
These barriers are designed to have properties that will ensure that the radioactivity in the
wastes is sufficiently contained so that it will not be released back to the surface in
unacceptable amounts that may cause harm to people and the environment. There are
common features to the multiple barrier systems in these illustrative concepts, which can
be described as follows:
The waste form: This is the form into which the waste is conditioned to make it suitable
for disposal. This form might be chosen so that it is very resistant to the leaching of
radionuclides by groundwater, as in the example of converting HLW into a glass waste
form.
The waste container: The conditioned waste is placed in a container (sometimes called a
canister), creating what is referred to as the waste package. The container must be
chosen so that the waste can be safely transported and handled leading up to its
disposal. The material and design of the container can be chosen to then provide reliable
physical containment under disposal conditions for extended periods of time. This can be
achieved in a variety of ways, for example, in the case of metallic containers, by using a
metal such as copper that is highly corrosion-resistant under certain chemical conditions
or by using sufficient thickness of a metal such as carbon steel so that it will take a long
time to be corroded through.
The buffer or backfill: The buffer or backfill in this context refers to material that is placed
immediately around emplaced waste containers in a disposal facility. The material and
design can be chosen so that the buffer or backfill provides one or more beneficial
functions. For example it can be used to control the chemistry of any groundwater that
may eventually contact the wastes so that radionuclides are not very soluble in the water,
as in the case of cement-based buffers or backfills.
Mass backfill: In addition to buffer or backfill to be placed immediately around the waste
containers, other types of “mass backfill” will be required to fill excavated access tunnels,
shafts or drifts. Again the material and design can be chosen so that the backfill provides
one or more beneficial functions, for example sufficient mechanical strength to ensure
other components of the barrier system are retained.
Sealing systems: Complementing the mass backfill, sealing systems will be required to
control the movement of fluids along previously excavated access tunnels, shafts or drifts
and through any part of the rock walls in these excavations that are more permeable to
groundwater flow, for example as a result of the underground engineering work. Typically
very low permeability materials are considered when developing designs of sealing
systems.
Geology: The geological barrier can provide one or more helpful functions in ensuring the
safety of disposal. These include:
17
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
•
limiting the flow of groundwater into the waste disposal areas (through low
permeability of the rock) so that there is limited potential for the leaching of
radionuclides from the wastes;
•
providing a long, slow flow path for groundwater to travel from the emplaced
wastes to the surface environment so that radioactivity will have decayed away
sufficiently that it cannot reach the surface in harmful quantities;
•
providing rock surfaces that will remove radionuclides from solution in
groundwater by naturally-occurring beneficial chemical processes;
•
providing dead-end fractures or pores where groundwater containing
radionuclides will effectively be stagnant;
•
preventing the direct release to the surface environment of any gas generated
from the wastes; and
•
protecting the emplaced wastes from extreme changes that may take place at
the Earth’s surface, as a result either of natural causes, as in the example of
glaciations, or of human actions.
In the case of the geological barrier, we will only know which safety functions we can rely
upon when we have conducted investigations at a candidate site.
Figure 5.1 shows the multiple barrier containment system of the UK Geological Disposal
Concept for ILW/LLW, employing cementitious materials as waste encapsulants and vault
backfill.
Figure 5.1:
UK geological disposal concept for intermediate level waste / low
level waste
Figure 5.2 shows the key features of the KBS-3V disposal concept developed by SKB
(Sweden) and Posiva Oy (Finland) for spent fuel, adapted to the disposal of vitrified HLW
and spent fuel in the UK context, employing a cast iron supported copper disposal
container and bentonite clay buffer.
18
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Figure 5.2:
KBS-3V disposal concept
Figure 5.3 shows key features of the Nagra (Switzerland) concept for the co-located
disposal concepts in Opalinus Clay host rock for vitrified HLW and spent fuel and for ILW.
The HLW/SF disposal concept involves the emplacement of steel waste containers
surrounded by bentonite clay buffer in horizontal tunnels. The ILW disposal concept
involves the use of cementitious waste encapsulants and vault backfill ("mortar"), and
shotcrete lining as support for the vaults.
Figure 5.3:
Opalinus clay co-located disposal concepts
Figure 5.4 shows the disposal of Transuranic wastes (long-lived ILW) in the bedded salt
host rock of the US-DoE Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), New Mexico, USA, which
typically does not require waste encapsulant material and uses bags of magnesium oxide
19
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
as a chemical buffer. The safety concept is based in part on enclosure of the waste and
buffer in the naturally-converging salt.
Figure 5.4:
US-DoE Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)
Figure 5.5 shows the schematic illustration of one of two alternative concepts for the
disposal of vitrified HLW and spent fuel in a salt dome, developed by DBE Technology
(Germany). In view of the limited depth of evaporite formations in the UK, the concept
based on emplacement in horizontal tunnels is used as an illustrative example. In this
concept, the spaces around the emplaced steel waste containers are backfilled with
crushed salt and the safety concept is based in part on the enclosure of the waste in the
naturally-converging salt.
Figure 5.5:
Salt dome disposal concept for vitrified HLW and spent fuel
20
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
In our work to evaluate these illustrative concepts we have adapted them to the UK
context. In particular we have developed conceptual designs that are scaled for the UK
Baseline Inventory and key concept issues have been interpreted for UK-specific factors.
As part of our evaluation work we undertake post-closure safety assessments; in these
assessments we take into consideration the impact of ranges of different flow
characteristics in the host rock and the variability in possible overlying geological
formations.
In addition to scaling the illustrative conceptual designs for the Baseline Inventory, we are
also developing and evaluating conceptual designs that could accommodate the possible
additional wastes and materials identified in Section 3. In this way, the range of possible
combinations of waste inventory and geological setting will be covered by our work
programme.
21
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
6 Reference case programme
A number of uncertainties are inevitably present at this early stage of the planning
process, some of which have been outlined in preceding sections, involving the nature
and quantities of the wastes for disposal, the geological setting and, related to this, facility
design. Other important areas of uncertainty involve the time required for deliberations to
enable key decisions to be made, for example decisions by local communities at key
stages of the site selection process or decisions by regulatory bodies variously on landuse planning, health and safety, or environmental protection matters.
In order to be able to plan and to provide certain sorts of information in light of this level of
uncertainty we have developed a reference case programme. This programme provides
both a basis for our planning and a framework for formal and transparent control of
significant changes to the programme as it evolves. We also use the reference case
programme to support the information on implementation of geological disposal that we
provide to UK Government and other interested parties.
The reference case programme has been developed in respect of implementing a
geological disposal facility for the Baseline Inventory. It is based on locating the facility in
a higher strength host rock since we have access to reliable and detailed information on
what would be entailed in developing the facility in such rock from the former United
Kingdom Nirex Limited programme. It assumes a depth of disposal of 650 metres below
ground level since that allows us to use the information on timings and costs that was
previously generated by Nirex for developing a facility at this depth. By making
assumptions such as this we have developed a reference conceptual design of a
geological disposal facility, which provides the basis for our estimations of timings and
costs of the various activities that we would carry out to implement a facility. To complete
the information we need to develop a reference case programme, we also make
assumptions, based on analysis of precedents in the UK and internationally, about the
durations of less technological aspects such as the various decision-making processes.
All this information is recorded in more detail in our developing provisional
implementation plans.
We use the reference case programme and its underpinning information and
assumptions for planning and benchmarking purposes. In developing the reference case
programme we are not seeking to present what we think will happen or what we want to
happen. Therefore the technical work programme will not be focussed solely on the
science and technology associated with the reference case programme. More generally,
we will seek to maintain awareness of all the relevant uncertainties and the way in which
they will change or be eliminated as successive decisions are made in the national
programme.
6.1 Reference conceptual design
The reference case programme currently used for planning purposes is based on the
assumption of a single geological disposal facility to accommodate all the wastes and
materials in the Baseline Inventory. In such a “co-located” disposal facility there would be
two distinct excavated disposal areas, separated by an appropriate distance, one for ILW,
LLW and uranium residues, and the other for HLW, spent fuel, plutonium and highlyenriched uranium. The disposal operations would share surface facilities, access tunnels,
construction support and security provision. This is in line with the statement made in
paragraph 4.25 of the MRWS White Paper that “in principle the UK Government sees no
case for having separate facilities if one facility can be developed to provide suitable safe
22
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
containment for the Baseline Inventory.” Since we take into account the need to prevent
deleterious interactions between the different types of wastes and engineered barriers in
such a facility, we believe that this represents a demanding scenario and therefore a
good benchmark for what needs to be considered at the current stage of the
implementation programme.
We maintain an exchange of information with the national programmes in countries such
as France and Switzerland where plans for co-located disposal of similar wastes are well
advanced. However, it is recognised that, as stated in the MRWS White Paper, “the final
decision would be made in the light of the latest technical and scientific information,
international best practice and site-specific environmental, social, economic and safety
and security assessments”, so the possibility that more than one facility would be
required is recognised.
The reference conceptual design uses the illustrative disposal concept examples for
higher strength rocks described in Section 5, comprising:
•
the concept previously developed in the UK for ILW/LLW disposal; and
•
the “KBS-3V” disposal concept developed in Sweden and Finland for the disposal
of spent fuel.
These concepts were selected because of the level of knowledge and experience arising
from the evaluations of conceptual designs developed for the UK waste inventory. For
much of the period from about 1980 to 2001 the focus of the UK programme was on ILW
and LLW, leading to the development of the UK geological disposal concept for these
wastes. In this period there was effectively a watching brief being maintained on the
concepts being developed in other countries for the geological disposal of HLW and/or
spent fuel. The MRWS programme, initiated in 2001, covered all higher activity
radioactive waste and hence it was necessary to assimilate the work on HLW and spent
fuel to test the viability of their geological disposal in the UK. The KBS-3V concept was
chosen as the benchmark for this test since it was, and still is, being carried forward in
two countries, Sweden and Finland, where it has been subject to independent regulatory
scrutiny and extensive international peer review.
Therefore there is confidence in using these concepts as a basis for planning. However,
as noted in Section 5, work is in hand to develop conceptual designs and evaluations for
concept examples appropriate to other host rock types so that confidence in these will be
increased.
Figure 6.1 shows a stylised layout of a co-located disposal facility based on these two
concepts, with all disposals at approximately the same depth and with physical
separation between the underground area containing disposal vaults for ILW, LLW and
uranium and that containing disposal tunnels and deposition holes for HLW, spent fuel,
plutonium and highly enriched uranium. However, it is recognised that the disposal areas
could be at different depths.
23
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Figure 6.1:
Schematic representation of a generic co-located geological disposal
facility
The way wastes are prepared for disposal, including their packaging, is important in
determining the numbers and characteristics of the disposal packages and, from that
information, the volume that the wastes will occupy when placed in a disposal facility. The
reference conceptual design adopts the packaging arrangements identified for ILW and
LLW in the 2007 UKRWI, in line with the definition of the Baseline Inventory in the MRWS
White Paper. The packaging assumptions for spent fuel, plutonium and uranium are
those identified in the MRWS White Paper definition of the Baseline Inventory. In the
reference case for vitrified HLW, the waste in its stainless steel storage container is
assumed to be placed inside a cast-iron supported copper container, as appropriate to
the KBS-3V disposal concept.
6.2 Interim surface storage and timing for disposal
The timing of the disposal programme is of course very important for planning, not only
for us but also for the organisations having responsibility for the wastes held in interim
storage and for communities affected by the management arrangements for the wastes.
The durations of each of the stages leading up to the start of disposal operations
identified in the MRWS White Paper can be estimated using information on the processes
that are to be followed, combined with experience on technical aspects such as
geological investigations drawn from the previous UK programme and from equivalent
programmes in other countries. Waste holders are currently assuming that a geological
disposal facility will be available to receive ILW and LLW in 2040 and HLW and spent fuel
in 2075. It is recognised that the basis for the MRWS site selection process is voluntarism
and partnership and consequently the process is driven in large part by discussions with
local communities. Furthermore all those involved to take stock before deciding whether
or not to move to the next stage at a particular site. Therefore this date, like all other
24
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
aspects of the reference case programme, must not be seen as fixed, but rather a
reasonable basis for planning based on current assumptions.
The timing of the receipt of wastes at the disposal facility is based on information in the
plans of the waste holders, for example the Lifetime Plans of Site Licence Companies
responsible for decommissioning and clean-up at sites within the NDA estate where
wastes are stored or will be produced in the future. There is considerable scope for
refining the plans and close cooperation with the waste holders is envisaged in this area
of planning.
6.3 Disposability assessments and costing studies
As part of the regulatory arrangements for the management of higher activity wastes, we
provide assessments of the disposability of proposed waste packages, as described in
Section 9.3.2. We use our reference conceptual design in the development of waste
package specifications and disposability assessments However, we also look to ensure
robustness of our specifications and assessments to the implications of an alternative
concept being adopted. This involves ensuring that all waste packages compliant with the
requirements of the reference conceptual design would be similarly compliant with
alternatives. Examples of the assessments conducted in relation to this include:
•
ensuring that the dimensions and weights of packages would be consistent with
the range of excavation dimensions and waste-handling equipment associated
with alternative disposal concepts and different geological settings;
•
ensuring that the radiation or heat emitted from waste packages would not
compromise the safe operation of the facility or long-term safety functions of the
engineered and natural barriers associated with alternative concepts; and
•
ensuring that the long-term safety of disposal of the wastes is not dependent on
some special feature of the reference conceptual design that would not be present
in alternative concepts.
We also ensure that we understand the differences in costs that would be associated with
implementing a different concept from that in the reference case and these differences
are included in the “parametric cost model” that we have developed and which is
described in Section 11.
6.4 Generic transport system
Once a geological disposal facility is constructed and regulatory authorisation has been
given to accept wastes for disposal, waste will need to be transported safely and securely
to the facility from the sites where it is being stored. We have developed a generic
transport system design that would meet these requirements.
25
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
International standards and guidance for the safe transport of radioactive materials have
been developed on the basis of world-wide experience and best practice. This experience
is distilled into the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Transport Regulations
(Ref. 17), which apply to road, rail, sea and air transport of radioactive materials. We
have developed a concept for a national transport system to transport safely, securely
and efficiently, in compliance with the IAEA Transport Regulations, all the UK’s higher
activity wastes from the sites where they are held to a geological disposal facility site.
This concept includes the specification of a range of transport packages i and vehicle
types, as well as transport operation logistics. Key aspects are:
i
•
development of designs and specifications for standard waste containers and
specifications for their allowable contents;
•
conceptual designs for a range of reusable shielded transport containers for the
transport of unshielded waste packages requiring shielding to protect the public
and/or workers from external radiation;
•
development of realistic transport routes and logistics for a national transport
system including all nuclear licensed sites holding higher activity wastes and any
one notional destination; and
•
development of designs for rail wagons, road vehicles and associated transport
equipment.
The term transport package is used to describe the form in which a waste package is transported.
It will sometimes be necessary for a waste package to be placed within a transport container, in
which case the waste package and transport container comprise the transport package.
26
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
7 Phases of work in the Geological Disposal Programme
The lifecycle of the Geological Disposal Programme can be described for planning
purposes as five phases, as shown in the stylised programme in Figure 7.1.
The overlapping Construction and Underground-Based Investigation and Operation
Phases will almost certainly represent a high proportion of the overall programme
timeline, but the figure is purely illustrative and the relative proportions of time shown for
each phase do not reflect our planning assumptions. Our planning assumptions about the
duration of each phase, leading to first emplacement of ILW in 2040 and first
emplacement of HLW in 2075 (as discussed in Section 6), are shown in the figure.
Figure 7.1 Geological Disposal Programme timeline indicating phases
As noted in the introduction, the MRWS site selection process defined by the
Government in the MRWS White Paper is based on a staged decision-making process,
comprising six stages in total, which will allow local decision making bodies to decide
whether to proceed to the next stage and the UK Government to determine whether it is
satisfied that the programme should be allowed to progress through from one stage to the
next. Figure 7.2 shows how the phases that we are using in planning the implementation
of geological disposal relate to the stages of the MRWS site selection process.
Figure 7.2
Relationship between programme phases and stages of the MRWS
site selection process.
27
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
In the following sub-sections we describe our work programme as we currently envisage
it during each of these phases.
7.1 Preparatory Studies Phase
The Preparatory Studies Phase comprises our work during the first four stages of the
MRWS site selection process. These first four stages are repeated here for reference:
•
Stage 1: Expression of interest, corresponding to the period up to the point
where a community decides to open up without commitment discussions with the
Government;
•
Stage 2: Initial screening out of unsuitable areas using sub-surface screening
criteria described in the MRWS White Paper, applied by the British Geological
Survey;
•
Stage 3: Community consideration leading to Decision to Participate following
which it is expected that a formal Community Siting Partnership will be set up as
described in the MRWS White Paper; and
•
Stage 4: Desk-based studies in participating areas.
Participating communities whose areas have not been screened out by the application of
sub-surface criteria (Stage 2), and who wish to continue their involvement by making a
decision to participate (Stage 3), will be carried forward to Stage 4, desk-based studies.
If large areas are considered as potentially suitable, local partners could, at the start of
Stage 4, undertake a preliminary review of their areas to identify potential candidate sites.
We are currently considering how we might support the local partners in this event, for
example by gathering data or providing relevant information, if they would find that
helpful.
Stage 4 of the site selection process will involve us in undertaking assessments focusing
on the specific site or sites once these are identified. These assessments will involve
gathering all available, relevant information about the candidate communities and sites
and evaluating that information using the criteria and process to be defined by the UK
Government for the site selection process. In response to a request from the UK
Government, we have developed criteria and proposals for the approach to be used in
Stage 4 of the site selection process (Ref. 18) which we will further consult on and
develop in the light of stakeholders’ views. The final criteria are likely to require
information to be collected on a wide range of characteristics including geology, natural
environment, landscape, specially designated natural and architectural features, transport
infrastructure and socio-economic conditions. This illustrative listing is not intended to be
exhaustive and we will work with local communities to ensure that local issues are
addressed in the assessments.
Assessments will be scrutinised by the independent regulators (who are identified in
Section 8) and by the Government’s advisory committee, CoRWM. Following completion
of these assessments and associated reviews, and of any additional work that
organisations required us to undertake to inform their respective deliberations:
•
the Community Siting Partnership would make recommendations to local
Decision Making Bodies about whether to proceed to the next stage of the site
assessment process;
28
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
•
the Decision Making Bodies would decide whether to proceed to the next stage
of the site assessment process; and
•
the UK Government would then decide on one or more candidate sites to take
forward to surface-based investigations in the subsequent Stage 5 of the site
assessment process.
7.1.1 Work programme in the Preparatory Studies Phase
Our work programme for the Preparatory Studies Phase currently includes:
ii
•
Supporting the UK Government’s and communities’ activities within the MRWS
programme.
•
Development and optimisation of geological disposal facility and transport system
designs: work will move on to the development and assessment of site-specific
geological disposal concepts and designs when candidate sites have been
identified.
•
Development of a peer-reviewed generic Disposal System Safety Case (DSSC)
by September 2010 and subsequent development and maintenance of the safety
case.
•
Making ready to support Stage 4 of the MRWS site selection process by
September 2010 ii including support, if required, to the identification of potential,
candidate sites within larger areas and desk-based studies of candidate sites.
•
Development of the MRWS site assessment process: progress will be dependent
on engagement with regional and national stakeholders and local communities
and the suitability of the potential areas. We will work in partnership with the local
communities to ensure their issues and concerns are addressed.
•
The commissioning of supporting research and development (R&D) to resolve
generic issues: this has involved developing an intensified R&D programme to
address uncertainties in the DSSC (including issues associated with new build
wastes) and engineering design of a geological disposal facility.
•
Determining the implications for the MRWS programme should the additional
wastes and materials (such as those from new nuclear power stations and used
fuels from the Ministry of Defence) be include within the Baseline Inventory.
•
Development of RWMD into a “prospective Site Licence Company (SLC)”, and
further organisational developments thereafter.
This date was the earliest we could envisage following publication of the MRWS White Paper and
we made preparations accordingly; it does not imply that we are expecting a local community to
make a Decision to Participate by then.
29
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
•
Continued application of the “Letter of Compliance (LoC) assessment process”:
through which we will continue to provide the nuclear industry with advice on the
packaging of radioactive waste and materials.
•
Public and stakeholder engagement.
•
Environmental assessment (including a generic Strategic Environmental
Assessment (SEA) and Sustainability Appraisal).
•
Development of plans for surface-based investigation of candidate sites in Stage
5 of the MRWS site selection process.
•
Continued engagement with the regulators. More details are given in sections 8
and 9.3.2 on the work that we are doing to support this engagement process.
•
Working with other parts of the NDA assisting with related strategic priorities.
The work programme delivers the information needed for the process of iterative
development of a geological disposal system, which is illustrated in Figure 7.3. This
shows how identified requirements and constraints are used to develop a disposal
system specification. A disposal system design is then developed to meet the
specification. This design is then subject to assessments of its safety and environmental
impacts. Information from R&D is required to support all these main activities and the
outputs from the assessments of safety and environmental impacts are used to identify
where further R&D is required.
Figure 7.3 Iterative development of a geological disposal system
In order to ensure coherent, comprehensive and cost-effective delivery of this work
programme to the required quality and timescale, we have currently identified eleven
main projects through which it will be managed. These project activities are supported by
internal assurance and business support functions. Research and development required
30
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
to support these projects is included within their scope. A brief description of these
projects and any significant outputs from them to date can be found below:
•
Disposal System Safety Case Project
This project is to develop approaches to the assessment of safety for a geological
disposal facility in each of the different geological settings defined in Section 4. This is to
provide a basis for the assessment of the prospective safety of geological disposal at
candidate sites, as will be required in support of Stage 4 of the MRWS site selection
process. It will set out for the regulators how a safety case for a geological disposal
facility will be developed in subsequent stages of the site selection process as information
becomes available from the investigation of candidate sites. The safety assessments
within the Disposal System Safety Case (DSSC) will provide the benchmark for the
provision of disposability assessments of waste packaging proposals under the Letter of
Compliance (LoC) process and of wastes that may be produced from new nuclear build
(as described in Section 9.3.2).
Under this project we are developing a Generic DSSC that sets out the methods and
types of data that will be used to assess the safety of transport of wastes to the
geological disposal facility, the safety of construction and operation of the geological
disposal facility, and the environmental safety of the geological disposal facility both
before and after it has been backfilled, sealed and closed. In particular it shows how
information related to safety will be produced for use in desk-based siting studies in the
future Stage 4 of the MRWS site selection process and thus to support Government
decisions on taking candidate sites forward for characterisation.
A combination of numerical assessments and qualitative arguments will be used to
demonstrate, at the generic stage, how the safety of geological disposal of the inventory
of higher activity wastes can be achieved and evaluated.
Currently we are finalising a suite of documents comprising the Generic DSSC, ready for
their external peer review which will start in April 2010.
•
Environmental Assessment and Management Project
The purpose of this project is to understand the potential impacts of implementing
geological disposal to ensure the regulatory requirements of the Environmental
Assessment Directives (Ref. 19) are met. It will also ensure appropriate management of
the potential impacts.
The MRWS White Paper (paragraph 5.41) put requirements on us to develop a strategy
for undertaking sustainability appraisals and environmental assessment. As part of this
project, after consultations, we have developed a strategy for sustainability appraisal and
environmental assessment that outlines the aims and objectives of the assessments,
when and how they would be undertaken in relation to the MRWS site selection process
and how stakeholders will be involved (Ref. 20).
Under this project, we will complete a Generic Strategic Environmental Assessment
(SEA) to assess the potential environmental, social and economic impacts of
implementing geological disposal. This will include consideration of alternative waste
management options that we will continue to keep under review and assess as
appropriate, in line with the relevant policy statement in the MRWS White Paper
(paragraph 4.32). The Generic SEA will also outline how these potential impacts could be
assessed in Stage 4 of the MRWS site selection process.
31
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
•
Disposal System Specification Project
The purpose of this project is to ensure that the requirements to be met by the geological
disposal system are up-to-date, well understood and justified. We are currently finalising
a Disposal System Technical Specification that will set out all constraints and
requirements for the design of a geological disposal system.
•
Disposal System Design Project
This project is to develop the design and costed engineering solutions for geological
disposal systems and associated waste transport system, to provide safe and secure
geological disposal. The outputs of the project provide the basis for safety assessments
and enable assessment of the potential environmental, social and economic impacts of
implementing disposal.
In this project we will continue to develop a range of geological disposal concepts that are
potentially suited for the range of geological settings identified in Section 4. This will
ensure that we will have the information required to undertake site assessments in
support of Stage 4 of the MRWS site selection process and will provide a solid basis and
understanding from which site-specific designs can be developed in due course. These
disposal concepts will be developed through iterations with safety and environmental
assessments and build upon ongoing research and development. This work will allow us
to conduct evaluations of alternatives at the appropriate point in site assessment studies.
We are finalising an outline geological disposal facility design document as a key input to
the Generic DSSC and are using this to obtain regulatory views on our approach to
disposal system design at this stage.
•
Optioneering Project
This project is to develop processes to support the selection of the most appropriate
design of geological disposal facility taking into account factors such as the wastes, the
geology and community requirements (for example retrievability).
We will continue to develop the approach that we will use to select optimal geological
disposal concepts and facility designs at the appropriate points in the programme, and
perform studies to provide the information required to support such decisions.
•
Letter of Compliance / Waste Package Specification and Guidance Project
In this project, we conduct the Letter of Compliance (LoC) assessment process in order
to provide disposability assessments for wastes expected to be disposed of to a
geological disposal facility and provide any “Requesting Parties”, proponents of the
construction of new nuclear power stations, with disposability assessments for wastes
that are proposed to be produced from their operation.
As part of this project we also develop waste package specifications to define the
requirements for a disposable waste package and guidance on its application to support
waste holders to produce proposals for waste retrieval, conditioning and packaging.
•
Site Assessment Methodology Project
The purpose of this project is to ensure we are in a position to undertake desk-based
studies and apply the UK Government site assessment methodology during Stage 4 of
32
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
the MRWS site selection process. The work we are undertaking currently under this
project is described earlier in this section of the report and many of the other projects
described will provide the necessary inputs of information.
•
Preparation for Surface Based Investigations Project
This project is to undertake sufficient preparatory work such that, when required, the
surface-based site investigations during Stage 5 of the MRWS site selection process will
provide the information we need in order to develop a geological disposal facility and the
information to meet the needs of others such as regulators and stakeholders. It is also to
ensure that the investigations can be implemented in a timely, cost-effective and efficient
manner.
We have identified the information that we believe we will require and the means of
obtaining that information (Ref. 21). We have also carried out an important preparatory
activity in developing a specification for the data management system for the surfacebased investigations (Ref. 22).
•
Public and Stakeholder Engagement and Communication Project
The aim of this project is to develop and implement our approach to public and
stakeholder engagement and communications to enable a wide range of stakeholders to
be involved in and influence the implementation of geological disposal in order that there
is public confidence in the proposed way forward.
The MRWS White Paper (paragraph 4.40) put requirements on us to develop a public
and stakeholder engagement strategy. As part of this project, after consultations, we
have developed a public and stakeholder engagement and communications strategy that
outlines the aims and objectives of the strategy and how we propose to engage and
communicate with stakeholders about our work programme on geological disposal (Ref.
23). This strategy has been agreed by the UK Government.
•
Organisational Development Project
Through this Project, we became a Prospective Site Licence Company (SLC) in
December 2009. This means that we are putting in place the organisational
arrangements and management systems that will be necessary for us to be capable of
holding an environmental permit and a nuclear site licence when the programme reaches
the stage when we are carrying out operations at a preferred site. Through this project we
are fulfilling commitments on organisational change that we have made to regulators and
Government.
A recent review by the regulators – the Environment Agency, the Nuclear Directorate of
the Health and Safety Executive and the Department for Transport - considered the
structure and staffing of the NDA's Radioactive Waste Management Directorate (Ref. 24).
We agreed with the regulators that the transition to Prospective SLC would be marked
by:
• arrangements being in place for us to voluntarily submit to regulatory scrutiny and
advice; and
• regulatory agreement that we have made progress toward meeting agreed
principles concerning the governance, structure and operation of our organisation
as a Prospective SLC as measured by specific progress criteria.
33
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
The regulators believe that we have made significant progress in working towards the
status of 'Prospective SLC' and further development is now needed to demonstrate that
the principles (including the criteria) have been fully achieved. This will require us to start
operating as a Prospective SLC under voluntary regulatory scrutiny to address the issues
raised in their review, and this has been done.
•
Programme Delivery Capability Project
We have initiated the Programme Delivery Capability Project to develop our organisation
into one that is capable of delivering the geological disposal programme to the
expectations of our stakeholders in a timely and cost effective manner. This requires a
combination of ongoing business activity, such as production of our monthly report, and
project activity, which includes implementation of new systems and procedures that will
equip us with the capability to manage such a significant programme as part of the wider
NDA portfolio.
Under this project we produce business plans as required for budget management and
the detailed plans required to support the UK Government and NDA spending decisions
mentioned in Section 2.
The implementation of the surface-based investigations will represent a major stepchange in the spend profile within our organisation. Many of the investigation activities
that will be required will be highly specialised and involve procurement of a wide range of
highly specialised contractors, many of whom are only able to undertake a relatively
narrow range of activities. A commercial strategy is being developed to cover this work. A
suppliers’ workshop was held in January 2009 to seek the views of potential suppliers on
the issues that the strategy needs to address, a strategy is being drafted for further
informal consultation during 2010.
Through this Project we have also secured the agreement of our Management Board to
our proposals for project support and control arrangements for the Prospective SLC.
•
Research & Development
The UK Government’s MRWS White Paper noted that the NDA has statutory
responsibility under the Energy Act 2004 (Ref. 25) for carrying out research to support the
activities for which it is responsible. Research and development required to support these
projects described above is included within their scope.
Much of the work in the projects described above is underpinned by the outputs from
research and development (R&D) work that has been conducted in the past and is
continuing in the UK and internationally. We published our R&D strategy in 2009 (Ref. 26)
following an extensive consultation exercise that was initiated by the publication of a
proposed strategy at the same time as the UK Government’s MRWS White Paper.
We describe our R&D programme as needs-driven. This means that we carry out R&D to
meet information needs that are identified through the iterative process of developing the
disposal system specification and design, and in assessing the performance of a
particular geological disposal concept, as illustrated in Figure 7.3. Information needs may
take a number of forms. In some cases it may be a data requirement, for example a need
for information relating to a specific material property to support a functional requirement.
In other cases the information need may be an improved understanding of a physical or
chemical process that is important for ensuring safety, or an improved capability to model
a particular process.
34
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
We are finalising a report on our proposed future R&D programme for publication in April
2010. This will present an analysis of the gap between our current knowledge on a given
aspect of geological disposal science or technology and that which we need to acquire.
We aim to address and reduce these gaps in our knowledge, so that we can be confident
in the arguments put forward to underpin the design and safety of the geological disposal
facility.
7.2 Surface Based Investigation Phase
The Surface-Based Investigation Phase will commence after the identification by
Government of one or more candidate sites at which surface-based investigations will
then be carried out. This corresponds to Stage 5 of the MRWS site selection process
(surface-based investigations on remaining candidates).
We appreciate that the MRWS site selection process is largely driven by discussions with
local communities. We will review planning assumptions as we gain a better
understanding of the likely rate of progress in the preceding stages of the MRWS site
selection process through dialogue with local communities engaged in the process and
with the UK Government. Following identification of candidate sites we will submit
applications for the necessary planning and regulatory permissions at the appropriate
times to enable the permissions to be granted prior to commencing investigations.
Surface based investigations include acquiring and interpreting information on the
geological and hydrogeological conditions at each candidate site. The information
obtained is to be used in developing a basis for the UK Government to identify a
preferred site, and will be an input into the development of the safety case, the
Environmental Impact Assessment and the engineering design of the geological disposal
facility. Where necessary, planning permission will be sought to undertake the
investigations.
The overall objective of the surface based investigations would be to provide sufficient
information to establish whether each candidate site is suitable for the development of a
geological disposal facility for the identified wastes. In order to deliver this objective, there
will need to be sufficient information to:
•
develop geoscientific understanding of the characteristics of the sites and to
permit engineering designs of the geological disposal facility to be prepared;
•
develop a safety case to a level of detail sufficient to allow a preferred site to be
identified to satisfy the regulators, community and other stakeholders;
•
enable the production of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA);
•
achieve a level of confidence in the characteristics of the preferred site such that
it is appropriate to proceed with seeking the regulatory and planning permissions
necessary for construction of a geological disposal facility at that site (noting that
we would expect to carry out underground-based investigations in parallel with
construction at the preferred site but if enough information were not obtained
from the surface-based investigations we would need to consider a separate
planning application for underground-based investigations); and
•
enable a more detailed assessment of the costs of development at each site.
Surface based investigations include initial non-intrusive geological and geophysical
surveys, then at a later date, drilling of boreholes to varying depths to investigate the
geology in more detail. Purely for planning purposes, an assumption is made that
35
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
surface-based investigations will be undertaken during a period of about ten years.
During the investigations, a baseline monitoring programme will be established to provide
information for a long-term monitoring programme that will run throughout the remaining
duration of the project.
Figure 7.4 shows geological mapping of an outcrop of rock during the surface based
investigations undertaken in the siting process for the Swedish geological disposal facility
for spent fuel. Figure 7.5 shows a seismic survey as an example of non-intrusive
geophysical surveying and Figure 7.6 shows the drilling of an investigation borehole.
Figure 7.4:
Geological mapping of an outcrop of granitic rock during site
investigations at Oskarshamn, Sweden
Figure 7.5:
Seismic survey
36
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Figure 7.6:
Exploratory borehole as part of the surface-based investigations
Assessment work that we expect to carry out in the Surface Based Investigation Phase
includes the development of site-specific Disposal System Safety Cases and
Environmental Impact Assessments (covering environmental, social and economic
impacts). We will work in partnership with the Community Siting Partnerships to ensure
that local issues are addressed in the selection and will evaluate the sites against the
criteria agreed as part of the UK Government’s site assessment process. The UK
Government proposes that once these more detailed assessments have been completed
they will be reviewed, as described previously in relation to Stage 4 of the site selection
process, and:
•
the Community Siting Partnership would make recommendations to its local
Decision Making Bodies about whether to proceed to the next stage of the site
selection process;
•
the Decision Making Bodies would decide whether they wish to proceed to the
next stage of the site selection process; and
•
the UK Government would make an informed decision on a preferred site for
implementation.
Regional and national stakeholder engagement will continue throughout this phase. It is
expected that key discussion areas will include the investigations and assessments being
undertaken at the sites and the development of the geological disposal facility design.
The communities will also be discussing the package of measures to meet local needs
that they would like to see implemented alongside the facility.
Figure 7.7 shows the possible surface site layout for Sweden’s geological disposal facility
at Forsmark which SKB announced in 2009 as the site for the geological disposal facility
for Sweden’s spent nuclear fuel. In our programme this announcement would correspond
37
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
to the end of Stage 5 of the MRWS site selection process when the UK Government
selects its preferred site for the geological disposal facility.
Figure 7.7:
Possible surface site layout for a geological disposal facility for
spent nuclear fuel at Forsmark, Sweden (SKB)
7.3 Construction and Underground Based Investigation Phase
The Construction and Underground Based Investigation Phase is expected to commence
when a preferred site for the geological disposal facility has been identified by the
Government. This relates to Stage 6 of the MRWS site selection process (underground
operations). Appreciating that the MRWS site selection process is largely driven by
discussions with local communities and purely for planning purposes, an assumption is
made that the Government could be in a position to take this step around 2025. This
recognises our current estimate that about ten years will be required to conduct the actual
surface-based investigations in the preceding phase of our work programme.
Following the identification of the preferred site the applications for planning and
regulatory permissions will be submitted. During this process, the
procurement/contractual arrangements for construction will be finalised.
We plan to undertake underground investigations in parallel with construction at the
preferred site. The aim of this work will be to confirm whether the site is suitable to host a
geological disposal facility that complies with safety and environmental regulatory
requirements. This process will be subject to regulatory scrutiny and, at hold-points
agreed with regulators, we will need to submit documents meeting specified requirements
for regulatory consideration. If the site meets the regulatory requirements, the regulators
would be expected to permit construction of a geological disposal facility to proceed.
Planning permission will be required for underground investigative work and construction
of the geological disposal facility. It is envisaged that a single planning application could
be made, covering underground investigations and the construction of the disposal
facility, rather than applying initially for solely the underground investigations. If we cannot
obtain sufficient information from the surface-based investigations carried out in Stage 5
38
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
of the MRWS site selection process to support such an approach, then it would be
necessary to consider separate planning applications for underground investigations and
facility construction.
The granting of planning and regulatory permissions will then initiate the start of physical
construction activities.
Initially, sufficient infrastructure, comprising surface facilities, shafts and underground
tunnels will be constructed to allow us to undertake underground investigations and begin
long-term demonstrations and testing. The investigations, demonstrations and testing will
enable further development of the models and assessments of system performance that
support the safety case. The information gained will be incorporated into the refinement
of the geological disposal facility design and safety and financial cases, and used in
updating regulatory submissions.
Figure 7.8:
Surface facilities constructed at WIPP, Carlsbad (New Mexico) USA.
If the regulators give permission for construction of the geological disposal facility to
proceed, further tunnels and disposal areas will be excavated. During this construction
stage, engineered facilities will be commissioned in preparation for the various
operations, including receipt, inspection and emplacement of waste underground. The
following description of the engineering work that we will undertake is based on our
analysis of the reference conceptual design outlined in Section 6. The details of the
engineering of the eventual geological disposal facility will of course depend on factors
such as the geological conditions, the inventory for disposal and the rate and timing of
waste disposals.
Based on the work that we have conducted to date, receipt facilities at the geological
disposal facility are currently expected to include a waste handling and transfer building
and a transport-container maintenance and storage building. Buffer/backfill handling
facilities will be constructed.
39
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Access underground is assumed to be via an inclined tunnel (a “drift”), with three shafts
constructed for ventilation and spoil removal. The final design will be based on the
information collated during the Surface Based Investigation Phase and the underground
investigations undertaken at the start of the Construction and Underground Based
Investigation Phase. The selection and design of the most appropriate form of access
depends on several factors, including package throughput, the depth of the vaults, the
geological characteristics and the views of stakeholder groups and the public.
Figure 7.9:
Tunnels in the underground research laboratory at Bure, France
Following the receipt of relevant approvals, the underground facilities will be developed in
stages to enable waste emplacement operations to commence.
Key underground facilities that would be constructed include underground waste receipt
facilities, disposal vaults (for ILW, long-lived LLW and uranium residues), deposition
tunnels (for HLW, spent fuel, plutonium and highly-enriched uranium), and buffer/backfill
handling facilities. In line with the MRWS White Paper, we currently assume that the
underground facilities would be constructed and equipped in such a way that the option of
waste retrievability is not excluded. We expect to discuss waste retrievability and its
implications for engineering design with the local community and the regulators well in
advance of finalising the design. The finalised design would then reflect the decisions
made in the light of those discussions.
Later in the Construction and Underground Based Investigation Phase, additional
disposal vaults and deposition tunnels will be constructed, equipped and commissioned
as required. Construction and waste emplacement activities will be managed to ensure
physical segregation of the two activities.
We will undertake a programme of inactive and active commissioning of surface waste
receipt and handling facilities, underground waste receipt and transfer systems, and
waste emplacement systems.
40
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
We will also undertake a programme of monitoring throughout the construction activities.
This will be intended to validate construction design, for example by confirming the
stabilisation of the rock by engineered support or the control of groundwater inflows into
excavated tunnels. The monitoring programme will also be intended to ensure there are
no adverse environmental impacts from construction, for example the discharge from the
facility of untreated groundwater containing levels of impurities such as natural salts that
are unacceptable.
Stakeholder consultation at the local, regional and national level will continue throughout
the Construction and Underground Based Investigation Phase. We will continue to work
in partnership with the local community through arrangements that best meet their needs.
7.4 Operation Phase
The Operation Phase will start when we have obtained all the relevant permissions and
authorisations to receive and emplace waste at the geological disposal facility. Purely for
planning purposes, and appreciating that the MRWS site selection process is largely
driven by discussions with local communities, an assumption is made that ILW
emplacement could commence around 2040.
Operations will include waste receipt, inspection and emplacement underground.
During the Operation Phase, additional disposal vaults and deposition tunnels will be
constructed, equipped and commissioned as required. Construction and waste
emplacement activities will be managed to ensure physical segregation of the two
activities.
On-site transport operations associated with the geological disposal facility include the
transportation of radioactive waste, construction materials, excavation spoil and
personnel. Careful attention to the design of the transport system, selection of the most
appropriate transport modes, transport routes and sympathetic infrastructure
development will all serve to minimise any potential environmental impact and, at the
same time, result in a transport system which can be operated in a safe and efficient
manner.
Under currently established arrangements, prior to any waste packages being
despatched to the geological disposal facility a rigorous system of checking and
monitoring of each package will be carried out by the despatching organisation (the waste
owner or the organisation acting on behalf of the waste owner). This will ensure in
particular that the specific identification of individual waste packages in terms of the
nature and quantity of waste is confirmed and the package will have to be shown to
comply with the waste acceptance criteria that we will establish for receiving waste at the
disposal facility.
Upon arrival, vehicle documentation of trains or road vehicles carrying transport
packages will first be checked and processed before packages are allowed onto the
geological disposal facility site.
Waste packages will be transferred within a Waste Handling and Transfer Building for
subsequent transportation underground via an inclined drift. Following receipt of
packages onto the disposal facility site, we will carry out inspections, for example physical
examination of the waste container and radiological measurements of surface
contamination and the package contents. This would ensure that any damage sustained
41
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
in transit is detected before emplacement of waste in the facility and act as a cross-check
on the inspection carried out at the point of despatch.
The means of emplacing the waste underground will depend upon the design of the
geological disposal facility and of the waste packages.
The duration of the Operation Phase will be determined by a number of technical and
economic factors, in particular the time it takes to emplace waste in the geological
disposal facility in an acceptable manner and in accordance with an acceptable
environmental safety case, as well as factors such as the decommissioning strategies for
nuclear power stations. The length of time for this phase will be revisited in the future as
more information becomes available. Appropriate controls on the environmental
conditions and associated monitoring arrangements will be maintained in the disposal
areas and underground facilities to ensure safety and security.
We will continue to work in partnership with the community at the site to ensure their
issues and concerns are addressed.
Environmental and operational monitoring will continue throughout.
7.5 Closure Phase
The decision on when to close the facility after all of the waste has been placed
underground for final disposal will take into consideration the views of the local
community. An assessment of the potential impacts of carrying out closure operations will
be undertaken to optimise the process, taking account of the outcomes of discussions
with the regulators and local community. We expect the exact condition of the surface site
at the end of closure operations will be agreed through consultation with the UK
Government, regulators and the local community. A key aim of the Closure Phase will be
to achieve that state.
Leading up to closure of the underground facilities, disposal vaults and deposition tunnels
will have been backfilled, the underground openings sealed and the access ways
backfilled and closed. The specifications, designs and methods of emplacement of seals
and backfill will be determined by analyses of their required functions in providing safety
and security.
Surface facilities will be decommissioned, stripped of engineering equipment and
demolished. The surface environment will be remediated and landscaped to the end state
agreed with the UK Government, regulators and the local community.
For planning purposes a notional period of 10 years has been included during which time
backfilling, sealing and closure will be implemented.
Monitoring of the closure operation and the environment will continue throughout the
closure phase.
Records from the geological disposal facility will be placed in a national archive for use as
required by future generations. Any physical marking of the site that might be required by
the UK Government, regulators or in an agreement with the local community will be
undertaken.
42
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Following closure, the facility will be the responsibility of the authority charged with
institutional control. A period of post-closure monitoring could be undertaken by that
authority.
43
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
8 Regulatory requirements
In consultation with UK Government Departments and regulatory bodies we are
developing a Permissions Schedule that is consistent with the policy set out in the MRWS
White Paper. It aligns regulatory requirements with the stages of the site selection
process set out in the MRWS White Paper.
Permissions Schedules have been developed and used successfully by UK implementers
and regulators in progressing other regulated nuclear projects. We have agreed the use
of the term with the regulators since it is well-understood by decision-makers in this field.
The Geological Disposal Programme is at an early stage of planning so the Permissions
Schedule is currently viewed by us as reflecting a process that we will follow to seek the
required permissions rather than a timetable for submissions and assessments.
The principal regulatory bodies identified in the MRWS White Paper are as follows:
•
Health and Safety Executive (HSE) which through its Nuclear Installations
Inspectorate (NII) regulates the nuclear, radiological and industrial safety of
nuclear installations.
•
Environment agencies, the Environment Agency in England and Wales, which
authorises and regulates radioactive and non-radioactive discharges and
disposals to air, water and land.
•
Office for Civil Nuclear Security which is a division within the HSE Nuclear
Directorate responsible for regulating security arrangements in the civil nuclear
industry.
•
Department for Transport which, with other organisations, regulates the safety of
radioactive material transport by road, rail and sea in Great Britain.
These arrangements are subject to change, since it is planned that the HSE Nuclear
Directorate will operate as a Statutory Corporation as the Office for Nuclear Regulation,
incorporating the current responsibilities of the Department for Transport (Ref. 27).
Local authorities will perform a dual role in the MRWS programme. In the context of the
Permissions Schedule they act in the role of land-use planning regulator (where their
precise role will depend on whether the application for development consent for a
geological disposal facility will be taken by an Infrastructure Planning Commission, as
discussed in the MRWS White Paper). However, they will also act as the decision-making
bodies on behalf of local communities participating in the site selection process. Although
not part of the regulatory process, the willingness of the local community to proceed with
the site assessment process is of course essential to progress the implementation of
geological disposal. Up until the end of Stage 5 of the MRWS site selection process a
community has a right of withdrawal. Local Authorities have the responsibility as decisionmaking bodies, for exercising the right of withdrawal or deciding to proceed, based on
advice and recommendations from the Community Siting Partnership.
Therefore, interactions with potential host communities, in particular through Community
Siting Partnerships, are important and are taken into account in the Permissions
Schedule, as far as possible at the current stage in the MRWS programme. As potential
host communities become engaged with the site selection process we expect that they
may well develop requirements for further documents to provide the information that they
will need to carry out their own assessments.
44
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
8.1 The Permissions Schedule
The Permissions Schedule for Geological Disposal sets out :
•
the regulatory submissions to be made by us;
•
the assessments to be made by regulatory organisations; and
•
the permissions we will need to obtain throughout the stages in the site selection
process set out in the UK Government’s Managing Radioactive Wastes Safely
(MRWS) White Paper.
The Permissions Schedule covers the regulatory disciplines of:
•
environmental protection (including any radioactive discharges and transboundary pollution);
•
nuclear safety (including provisions for third party claims and liability);
•
land-use / spatial planning (including supporting environmental assessment
work);
•
transport safety;
•
nuclear security; and
•
non-proliferation (nuclear safeguards).
There is no timescale set out in the MRWS White Paper for completion of the stages of
the site selection process, and the Permissions Schedule ‘timeline’ therefore cannot link
to any specific dates. Our regulatory submissions and the regulators’ assessments have
been co-ordinated in the Permissions Schedule and ‘kept in step’ to allow progress to be
made simultaneously across all the regulatory disciplines. This means that the full suite of
regulatory views will be available at the relevant point in each stage in the MRWS site
selection process to inform decision-making.
The Schedule shows which submissions, assessments and permissions will be needed
across all the regulatory disciplines in the respective stages of the MRWS site selection
process and it also shows, for each regulatory discipline, the series of submissions,
assessments and permissions.
The links to the MRWS site selection process are as follows:
•
During Stages 1 to 3 (Expression of Interest; Initial screening out of unsuitable
areas; and Community consideration leading to Decision to Participate) no site
selection decisions will have been taken. The Permissions Schedule sets out the
‘generic’ (non-site-specific) assessment work to be undertaken by us, and the
regulatory scrutiny of this work needed to inform communities and to underpin
the work to be undertaken in subsequent stages.
•
In Stage 4 (Desk-Based Studies) we will carry out a strategic environmental
assessment (SEA) to assess the potential environmental, social and economic
impacts of implementing geological disposal. Also, for each candidate
community and candidate site, we will make evaluations against criteria that are
being developed through consultation with stakeholders and the public before
seeking their agreement by UK Government (Ref. 18). These evaluations will
feed into the UK Government’s site selection process. The local community has
the Right of Withdrawal at this stage and decision-making bodies acting on
behalf of the community would have to decide to proceed for a candidate site to
remain within the process. Subject to a decision not to exercise the Right of
Withdrawal, regulatory assessments of this desk-based work will inform the UK
45
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Government’s decision on which candidate sites to take forward to surfacebased investigations.
•
In Stage 5 (surface-based investigations on remaining candidates) we will begin
surface-based investigations and, after making the appropriate applications and
receiving the necessary planning permissions and environmental permits, start
drilling boreholes. We will use the results gained from the surface-based
investigations to construct preliminary safety evaluations and environmental
impact assessments to support future activities. Again, the local community has
the Right of Withdrawal at this stage. Subject to the Right of Withdrawal not
being exercised, regulatory assessments of this work will inform the UK
Government’s decision on the preferred site to take forward into Stage 6 of the
MRWS site selection process.
•
In Stage 6 (underground operations) the Permissions Schedule sets out the
applications for planning permission(s), a nuclear site licence, a revised
environmental permit and other permissions that we will need to carry out
underground operations (underground investigations, construction and waste
emplacement) at the preferred site. The licence and permits will impose a series
of regulatory hold-points prior to the commencement of significant elements of
the work such as construction of the shaft and waste emplacement. Depending
on the level of the information obtained from surface-based investigations, it may
be necessary to consider separate planning applications for underground-based
investigations and facility construction.
8.2 Future documents
We have produced a list of the key publications that we are planning currently. This list
will be updated annually. The current list includes the suite of documents being produced
to describe, and assess the potential impacts of, the generic geological disposal system.
The Generic Disposal System Safety Case and the Generic Strategic Environmental
Assessment, described in Section 7.1, will draw together all these strands of work to
provide the regulators, local communities and other stakeholders with assessments of the
likely impacts of implementing geological disposal.
46
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
9 Working with other organisations
In order to successfully implement our work, we have to work closely with a number of
other organisations. Amongst the most important of these interrelationships are the ones
with the UK Government, with local decision making bodies, with Community Siting
Partnerships and with current and prospective waste producers as described below.
There are also important interactions with other organisations such as the regulatory
bodies, which have been described earlier in this report.
9.1 The UK Government
The UK Government has given us the mandate for implementing the policy of geological
disposal for higher activity wastes. It approves the NDA’s annual plan and sets NDA’s
budget through the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) settlement in the
Government’s three-year spending review cycle.
It owns the site selection process and will take the key decisions required to move the
process through successive stages up to the selection of a preferred site (at the end of
Stage 5 of the MRWS site selection process). In particular, the site assessment
methodology must be agreed by the UK Government before being applied in Stage 4 of
the MRWS site selection process, the desk-based studies stage. Following application of
the methodology and the review and consideration of the outcomes by the relevant
parties and local decisions about continued participation, the UK Government will decide
on the sites to be taken forward into Stage 5, the surface based investigations stage. At
the end of this stage, again following review and consideration by relevant parties, the UK
Government will make an informed decision on a preferred site to take forward into Stage
6, the underground operations stage. Throughout this process, we will provide the UK
Government with the financial and technical information it requires to maintain progress
and to support decision-making.
9.2 Community Siting Partnerships and decision making bodies
The expectation in the MRWS White Paper is that following a local decision to participate
in the site selection process, a formal Community Siting Partnership will be set up and will
work with us and other relevant interested parties for the remaining stages of the process.
We will seek to work with partnerships in a way that maximises their ability to comment
on our plans and activities. In particular we will consult with local communities on the
development of the site assessment methodology before it is submitted for agreement
with the UK Government. Once the methodology is agreed we will work with the
partnerships to ensure that local issues are addressed in the assessments and that the
partnerships are involved in the review and evaluation of the assessments before they
are finalised for consideration by decision-making bodies. Once the assessments have
been finalised in both Stages 4 and 5 of the process, the Community Siting Partnerships
play a key role in recommending to the decision-making bodies whether to proceed.
At the end of Stages 4 and 5 of the MRWS site selection process the Decision Making
Bodies make a decision about moving forward to the next stage of the process. We will
work closely with them to ensure our assessments address their requirements.
9.3 Site Licence Companies (SLCs)
Under arrangements established by the NDA to discharge its responsibilities for
decommissioning and clean-up at nuclear sites, Site Licence Companies (SLCs) manage
47
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
the required operations at the respective sites within the NDA estate. Each SLC within
the NDA estate is required to publish a Lifetime Plan, which is periodically updated.
These describe the key elements of the programme of work, and their timing and the
associated costs, which will be required to remove waste from the site and ultimately
bring the site to an agreed state in terms of removal of redundant buildings and
engineering plant and suitability for future use. We also work with other SLCs that are not
part of the NDA estate and which hold higher activity waste requiring geological disposal.
From the time of our establishment as RWMD, we have put significant effort into
identifying the interdependencies of the geological disposal programme and the
programmes of the SLCs (in the case of those within the NDA estate, as defined in their
respective published Lifetime Plans). The main interdependencies are outlined below.
9.3.1 Emplacement rates, inventory and packaged volumes
An important interdependency relates to the operational period of the geological disposal
facility when the waste will be dispatched to the facility for emplacement underground.
This determines the time when all waste can be removed from the site at which it is
stored and thereafter when the site can be put to a future use; these factors have an
important bearing on the costs of decommissioning and clean up and are important to
regulators, stakeholders and the local communities. The ILW throughput used in planning
the geological disposal facility is aligned to the aggregate of the volumes of this waste
type that are shown (for example in Lifetime Plans) as being produced by each of the Site
Licence Companies.
Further work is required to fully align the planning of geological disposal and the relevant
SLC Lifetime Plans relating to HLW and spent fuel in the Baseline Inventory. The work is
needed in three broad areas; the rate of disposal, the assumed inventory for disposal,
and the amount of material loaded into a disposal package. These three aspects of the
management of these materials are inter-related and impact on each other and on the
cost.
9.3.2 Letter of Compliance / Waste Package Specification and Guidance
Revised regulatory arrangements have been in place for the management of higher
activity wastes on nuclear licensed sites since January 2004 (Ref. 28). The arrangements
aim to ensure that proper consideration is given to the long-term management of wastes
at the earliest stage possible (i.e. before they are created in the case of wastes from
proposed new nuclear power stations). To service these arrangements, the Environment
Agency of England and Wales (EA), and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency
(SEPA), have established nuclear waste assessment teams to facilitate the provision of
advice to the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII).
The regulators (NII, EA, SEPA) have developed joint guidance to industry on the
operation of the arrangements (Ref. 29). The joint guidance requires nuclear site
licensees to produce ‘Radioactive Waste Management Cases’ for their higher activity
wastes. Radioactive Waste Management Cases should set out the plans for retrieving,
conditioning, storage and ultimate disposal of the wastes, and provide reasoned
argument why the conditioned waste is believed to be disposable.
The Letter of Compliance (LoC) process is recognised as a key input to Radioactive
Waste Management Cases and the regulators expect nuclear site licensees to seek
advice on disposability of waste from us through the LoC process. The LoC process is
operated by us in our capacity as implementer of geological disposal in the UK as a
48
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
service to the nuclear industry. The primary output from the LoC process is the
Assessment Report which sets out for the waste producer the case for disposability. The
Assessment Report will be accompanied by a Letter of Compliance, as appropriate, when
compliance with our understanding of the requirements for geological disposal is
demonstrated. It is the responsibility of the waste producer to understand the advice that
we provide and to use it to demonstrate appropriate management of the wastes to the
regulators through the Radioactive Waste Management Case.
In order for the regulators to have confidence in the LoC process and the underlying
assessments, we and our technical assessment process are subject to scrutiny by the
environment agencies’ nuclear waste assessment teams. A series of scrutiny projects
have been undertaken and reports of the findings have been produced and published (for
example Ref. 30).
9.4 Contribution to new nuclear-build Generic Design Assessment (GDA)
Government policy for new nuclear-build in the UK requires “requesting parties” to submit
proposed reactor designs to the regulators’ Generic Design Assessment process. We
have been identified by regulators as the appropriate body to advise requesting parties
on disposability issues associated with higher-activity wastes. In order to support this
process we have used the well established principles from the LoC process to develop a
tailored process for provision of advice to requesting parties. This process is described in
a protocol (Ref. 31) agreed with regulators and requesting parties in 2008. This process
is managed within our Letter of Compliance / Waste Package Specification and Guidance
Project.
9.5 Contribution to Integrated Waste Strategy
The NDA has developed a National Integrated Waste Strategy (Ref. 32). The principles of
this strategy include the application of the waste hierarchy and deciding how to manage
wastes on the basis of business cases that take account of the full lifecycle of alternative
waste management options. Where appropriate we participate in projects that are
undertaken in support of this strategy. For example, we are involved in the NDA project to
consider alternative waste management options for the large quantity of graphite waste
that will result from reactor decommissioning and that is currently included in the Baseline
Inventory. We are also participating in the European Commission – sponsored
CARBOWASTE Project that is investigating important technical aspects of this issue.
9.6 International relations
We have developed relationships with counterpart organisations in other countries in
order to provide access to international good practice. Many of these organisations face
challenges similar to our own and it makes sense to share experiences, learn lessons
and create synergistic relationships to enhance value for money. Where appropriate, this
is achieved through establishing bilateral agreements or other formal or informal
mechanisms.
Bilateral agreements somewhat ease the process of co-operating with other
organisations by facilitating liaison and indicate the mutual respect each has for the
other’s capabilities and standard of work. They provide a number of benefits, and
importantly allow for international benchmarking, training opportunities and access to
information which may otherwise not be available. They could also provide a basis for
entering into commercial arrangements where appropriate.
49
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
Through the NDA we will continue to maintain bilateral relationships with the
organisations listed in Annex 1 and establish new ones where justified. All new bilateral
agreements will be subject to an appropriate business case to ensure it will deliver
genuine value. The value delivered by an agreement will be evaluated before the
agreement is renewed. The NDA prioritises its interactions with the respective
organisations based on its business objectives and needs.
We undertake high level involvement with the United Nations International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA), Nuclear Energy Agency of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation
and Development (NEA), the European Commission (EC), other organisations, and
national governments, where our input (where appropriate in liaison with the Government
Department for Energy and Climate Change) can help influence technical, legislative and
policy development, and promote good relations. In particular we take part in the
International Association for Environmentally Safe Disposal of Radioactive Materials
(EDRAM), (Ref. 33) and the European Union’s Club of Waste Management Agencies iii in
order to maintain high level networking with counterpart organisations and to explore
further opportunities for accessing international good practice.
In order to gain further experience and maximise financial leverage, we take part in
internationally co-ordinated joint research and development, working groups or other
collaborative mechanisms, such as through the EC’s R&D Framework Programme
(including the Technology Platform for Implementing Geological Disposal (Ref. 34)), IAEA
and NEA.
9.6.1 Benchmarking
We have undertaken a benchmarking exercise with other comparable programmes to
validate our programme. This work has included the programme of the Swedish waste
management organisation, SKB, on its geological disposal concept for spent fuel (as the
reference case programme is based in part on implementing the KBS - 3V design), and
also the French and Belgian geological disposal programmes. SKB has also been
commissioned to undertake an independent review of the current programme to inform
the programme’s future development and improvement.
iii
The Club of Agencies’ members are the waste management organisations of the EU and
Switzerland, and the EC’s Directorate General of Energy and Transport and the Directorate
General for Research
50
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
10 Engaging and communicating with the public and stakeholders
We are committed to working in partnership with the communities who participate in the
site selection process. Experience, both in the UK and overseas, has shown that where
the public and other stakeholders have been involved in the decision making process,
better decisions have been made which also stand a better chance of being
implemented. Building stakeholder confidence is vital to making progress with
implementing geological disposal (Ref. 35). Those countries with inclusive and
innovative engagement and communication programmes (e.g. Belgium, Finland and
Sweden) have been able to work in partnership with the potential host communities and
make significant progress towards implementation. Research shows that active
engagement of stakeholders, especially in the early stages of a project, increases the
chances of success and can create significant savings in the long term (Ref. 36). Early
involvement allows stakeholders’ issues to be addressed, preventing problems later and
avoiding legal challenge. These are the reasons why we have developed an active Public
and Stakeholder Engagement (PSE) and Communications Strategy (Ref. 23).
The aim of the PSE and Communications Strategy is to outline our approach to enable a
wide range of stakeholders to be involved in and influence the implementation of
geological disposal to improve decision making and build public confidence in the
proposed way forward.
We recognise that engagement will be taking place on a number of different levels
throughout the siting, development, construction, operation and closure of the facility. We
plan to engage appropriate stakeholders throughout the development of our work
programme on geological disposal. This is likely to involve the following:
•
Engaging appropriate stakeholders in previewing the work programme that is to
be undertaken including the scope and terms of reference for the work where
appropriate.
•
Undertaking specific joint fact finding projects where appropriate and reviewing
the work at key stages prior to finalisation.
•
Discussing preliminary results and their implications with stakeholders.
•
Engaging stakeholders in reviewing the results of work.
We will work with appropriate stakeholders to agree which approach will be suitable for
individual topics. We recognise that a wide range of stakeholders are interested in
geological disposal and that a range of engagement and communications mechanisms
will be needed to involve them in our programme. We will discuss the approach to
engagement and communication with stakeholders. We will provide clear and timely
feedback to stakeholders on actions taken and, if inputs are not acted upon, to explain
why in a timely manner. We will also review our engagement and communications work
to ensure that we learn lessons and continually improve.
We will develop a range of communications material and will develop documents with
different levels of detail to enable people to engage with issues at the level they feel
comfortable. All documents will contain an accessible executive summary so that people
can easily understand what the document is about.
We will develop a needs driven approach to PSE and communications i.e. one where
there is the greatest need for some form of engagement. In no particular order this needs
driven approach will be based on:
51
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
•
involving stakeholders to define the processes which allow their needs and
issues to be considered and, where appropriate, addressed;
•
statutory requirements;
•
the stage of the geological disposal programme and the key issues that need to
be addressed at that time; and
•
good practice in the UK and internationally.
Our engagement work will include, in no particular order:
•
Consultations required as a consequence of statutory, regulatory or similar
requirements, for example, as part of strategic and environmental impact
assessment and the permissioning schedule.
•
Engagement as part of the NDA’s wider community engagement activities,
including Site and National Stakeholder Groups. This will include engagement
around specific topics that are relevant to the different stages of development of
the geological disposal facility.
•
Meeting the specific requirements of local communities that are involved in the
site selection process. This will include engaging with local decision making
bodies, host communities and wider local interests and the partnerships they
establish.
Engagement and communication with a wide range of stakeholders will also include
those bodies that have a formal role in regulating or overseeing our activities. This
engagement with statutory bodies will be visible and transparent to all stakeholders.
52
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
11 Cost
In order to plan the financing of the geological disposal programme and to inform UK
Government’s staged decision making process we evaluate the potential cost of the
geological disposal programme. This cost is affected by many factors, but the most
significant are the inventory of waste, the timing of waste arisings, the timing and duration
of each phase of implementation, the geology at the site of the geological disposal facility
and the design of the geological disposal facility itself.
At the current stage of planning there are inevitable uncertainties about all of these
factors. Therefore we have developed not only a reference case, comprising a
reasonable set of assumptions around a reference disposal concept as the planning
basis for the implementation programme, as described in previous sections, but also a
tool to identify the cost impact of other scenarios. The tool is termed the Parametric Cost
Model where the factors identified above are the equivalent of parameters in the cost
model.
For a given design and geological setting, the costs of a geological disposal facility can
be broken down into:
•
Fixed costs, such as the site selection and investigation programme and the
construction of the surface facilities, access shafts and access drift. These are
considered to be predominantly fixed costs as they are largely unrelated to the
volume of waste being emplaced; and
•
Variable costs, such as the construction and operation of underground
deposition tunnels for HLW and spent fuel and the underground disposal vaults
for ILW. These are considered to be variable costs as they vary with the volume
of waste being emplaced.
The cost of implementing geological disposal will increase if the inventory increases and
reduce if the inventory reduces. The relationship between inventory and cost is
approximately linear for the ‘variable’ cost component of the geological disposal facility. In
the cost model, if the total number of disposal packages (which is directly related to
inventory) increases then the duration of the emplacement programme is extended.
Should the timings of the arisings change from that currently assumed, then the costs
could be impacted. In practice, if the change in timings results in a longer period to
emplace waste in the facility there would be appropriate action taken, for example the
phasing of emplacement operations, to limit any increases in costs.
The type of rock in which the disposal areas are excavated and in which the access
shafts and drifts are constructed can influence the construction method and the
temporary and permanent support that is required to maintain the integrity of these
underground structures. Other characteristics of the geological environment, such as
stress in the rocks, will also be important. In very simple terms, rock-types that are less
mechanically strong will require greater engineered support and hence will be more costly
to develop. The increase in rock stress with increasing depth means that greater
engineered support is also likely to be required as the depth of excavations increases.
The design of the geological disposal facility is strongly influenced by its geological
setting and the inventory of wastes requiring disposal. However, a range of disposal
concepts are suitable for each of the different geological settings and the choice of
concept and hence of the engineering solutions (methods and materials) and method of
operation of the geological disposal facility will also influence costs.
53
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
The cost for the reference case is used as the current basis for planning, and this will be
refined as more information becomes available for concepts that are suitable for
candidate sites that have been identified by Community Siting Partnerships. The
modelling tool provides us with the knowledge of the impact that different scenarios in
which date of availability, rate of emplacement, inventory, etc are varied so that UK
Government can understand the impact that variances could have on the cost.
In addition to providing the required information on the geological disposal of legacy
wastes, the Parametric Cost Model is also used to provide UK Government with a
substantiated basis for assessing the costs of geological disposal of wastes that may be
produced from new nuclear power stations.
The estimated cost for the NDA’s share of the geological disposal programme for the
HLW, ILW, LLW and spent nuclear fuel in the Baseline Inventory is published in the NDA
Annual Report and Accounts (ARAC) (Ref. 4). In line with the requirement placed on the
NDA, the reported figures are “discounted costs” where account is taken of an annual
discount rate, an assumed rate of decrease in the value of money in the future. The
discounted cost of £3.7 billion reported in the 2008/09 ARAC is equivalent to an
undiscounted lifetime cost of about £12 billion. We provide information on when costs will
be incurred over the project lifetime, and this is used to calculate the discounted cost.
This estimated cost of geological disposal includes research, design, construction,
operation and closure of a disposal facility for the HLW, ILW, LLW and spent fuel in the
Baseline Inventory. The estimated undiscounted cost up to the time at which first waste is
emplaced (which we currently assume for planning purposes will occur in about 2040) is
about £4 billion. The cost excludes some significant activities, in particular the costs of
waste encapsulation and of transport of wastes to the geological disposal facility which
are the responsibility of the waste owner.
Costs of any post-closure monitoring of the facility during institutional control are not
estimated since these will be the responsibility of the authority charged with that control.
The estimated cost does not include disposing of the separated uranium and plutonium in
the Baseline Inventory, in line with the way these materials are treated in other areas of
the ARAC. Nonetheless, we have assessed the costs of geological disposal of these
materials and put these costs at circa £2 billion without discounting, assuming that they
will be disposed of in the same facility as the other wastes and in the way described in
Section 6 concerning the reference case.
54
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
12 References
1. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Department for Business,
Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, Welsh Assembly Government, and Department of the
Environment Northern Ireland, Managing Radioactive Waste Safely: A Framework for
Implementing Geological Disposal. Cm 7386, ISBN 0101738625, June 2008.
2. Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, Managing our Radioactive Waste
Safely - CoRWM’s Recommendations to Government, CoRWM Document 700, July
2006. Available at www.corwm.org.uk
3. UK Government and the devolved administrations, Response to the Report and
Recommendations from the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM),
(PB 12303) October 2006. Available at
www.defra.gov.uk/environment/radioactivity/waste/pdf/corwm-govresponse.pdf
4. NDA, Nuclear Decommissioning Authority Annual Report and Accounts 2008/2009, HC
694 London: The Stationery Office, ISBN 9780102960549, July 2009.
5. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Department for Trade and
Industry, Scottish Executive, Welsh Assembly Government, and Department of the
Environment Northern Ireland, Policy for the Long term Management of Solid Low Level
Waste in the United Kingdom, March 2007. Available at
www.defra.gov.uk/environment/radioactivity/waste/pdf/llw-policystatement070326.pdf
6. NDA-RWMD and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), The
2007 UK Radioactive Waste Inventory- A Review of Processes Contributing to
Radioactive Wastes in the United Kingdom, Defra Report Defra/RAS/08.004, NDARWMD Report NDA/RWMD/006, May 2008.
7. NDA-RWMD and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), The
2007 UK Radioactive Waste Inventory, Main Report, Defra Report Defra/RAS/08.002,
NDA-RWMD Report NDA/RWMD/004, May 2008.
8. Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, CoRWM’s Radioactive Waste and
Materials Inventory, CoRWM Document 1279, July 2005. Available at www.corwm.org.uk
9. The Scottish government, “Ministers Decline to Endorse Deep Storage”, 25 June 2007.
News release available at www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2007/06/25101822
10. NDA-RWMD, The Summary Disposability Assessment for the EPR, October 2009.
http://www.nda.gov.uk/documents/upload/TN-17548-Generic-Design-AssessmentSummary-of-Disposability-Assessment-for-Wastes-and-Spent-Fuel-arising-fromOperation-of-the-EPWR.pdf
11. NDA-RWMD, The Summary Disposability Assessment for the AP-1000, October
2009.
http://www.nda.gov.uk/documents/upload/TN-17548-Generic-Design-AssessmentSummary-of-DA-for-Wastes-and-SF-arising-from-Operation-of-APPWR-October2009.pdf.
12. United Kingdom Nirex Limited, The Viability of a Phased Geological Repository
Concept for the Long-term Management of the UK’s Radioactive Waste, Nirex Report No.
N/122, ISBN 1840293683, November 2005.
55
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
13. United Kingdom Nirex Limited, Specification for Waste Packages Containing Vitrified
High-level Waste and Spent Fuel, Nirex Report N/124, ISBN 1840293705, December
2005.
14. T.W. Hicks, T.D. Baldwin, P.J. Hooker, P.J. Richardson, N.A. Chapman, I.G.
McKinley and F.B. Neall, Concepts for the Geological Disposal of Intermediate-level
Radioactive Waste, Galson Sciences Limited Report to NDA-RWMD, 0736-1, 2008.
Available at www.nda.gov.uk
15. T.D. Baldwin, N.A. Chapman and F.B. Neall, Geological Disposal Options for Highlevel Waste and Spent Fuel, Galson Sciences Limited Final Report to NDA-RWMD, 2008.
Available at www.nda.gov.uk
16. United Kingdom Nirex Limited, Overview Report on Repository Concept and
Programme Development for High-level Waste and spent Fuel in the United Kingdom,
Nirex Report No. N/125, ISBN 1840293713, September 2005.
17. International Atomic Energy Agency, Regulations for the Safe Transport of
Radioactive Materials, 2005 Edition, IAEA (Vienna), 2005.
18. NDA-RWMD, A Proposed Framework for Stage 4 of the MRWS Site Selection
Process, Technical Note No. 8150715, June 2008. Available at www.nda.gov.uk
19. European Parliament and Council of the European Union, Directive on Environmental
Impact assessment of the Effects of Projects on the Environment, Amended EIA Directive
97/11/EC, 1998; and Directive on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Plans and
Programmes on the Environment, SEA Directive 2001/42/EC, 2001.
20. NDA-RWMD, Geological Disposal: A Strategy for Sustainability Appraisal and
Environmental Assessment, NDA-RWMD Report NDA/RWMD/014, 2009.
21. A. Parkes, An Approach to Characterising a Site for a Co-located Geological Disposal
Facility, Jacobs Engineering Report to NDA-RWMD, March 2009. Available at
www.nda.gov.uk
22. Tessella Support Services plc, Geosphere Characterisation Project: Data
Management Strategy, Report No. NDP/4998/FS/FR, 2007. Available at www.nda.gov.uk
23. NDA-RWMD, Geological Disposal: A Public and Stakeholder Engagement and
Communications Strategy, NDA-RWMD Report NDA/RWMD/015, 2009.
24. http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/static/documents/Business/RWMD_review_report_final.pdf accessed 22
February 2010
25. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, Energy Act, 2004. Available at www.uklegislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2004/ukpga_20040020
26. NDA-RWMD, The NDA’s Research and Development Strategy to Underpin
Geological Disposal of the United Kingdom’s Higher-activity Radioactive Wastes, NDARWMD Report NDA/RWMD/011, March 2009.
56
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
27. Health and Safety Executive (HSE), Update on the Transition of Nuclear Directorate
to a Statutory Corporation, HSE Paper No. HSE/10/07, January 2010.
28. Environment Agency, Health and Safety Executive and the Scottish Environment
Protection Agency, Improved Regulatory Arrangements for the Conditioning of ILW on
Nuclear Licensed Sites, 2004
29. Guidance from the Health and Safety Executive, the Environment Agency and the
Scottish Environment Protection Agency to nuclear licensees. “The management of
higher activity radioactive waste on nuclear licensed sites, Part I The regulatory process”
December 2007. http://www.hse.gov.uk/nuclear/wastemanage1.pdf
30. Environment Agency (EA), The Longevity of Intermediate-level Radioactive Waste
Packages for Geological Disposal: A review, Issue 1, EA Report NWAT/Nirex/06/003,
August 2008.
31. NDA, Disposability Assessment of Solid Waste Arisings from New Build, April 2008.
Available at http://www.nda.gov.uk/documents/upload/Disposability-Assessment-of-SolidWaste-Arisings-from-New-Build-April-2008.pdf
32. NDA, Integrated Waste Management – Overview, Version.1.0, December 2009.
Available at www.nda.gov.uk
33. www.edram.info accessed 22 February 2010.
34. European Commission (EC), Implementing Geological Disposal of Radioactive Waste
Technology Platform, Vision Report, EC Report EUR 24160 EN, ISBN 978-92-79-136221, 2009.
35. CARL Consortium, Wanting the Unwanted: Effects of Public and Stakeholder
Involvement in the Long-Term Management of Radioactive Waste and the Siting of
Repository Facilities: Final Report Carl Project, 2008. Available on request from
[email protected]
36. NDA-RWMD, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Department for
Trade and Industry, Welsh Assembly Government, and Department of the Environment
Northern Ireland, Managing Radioactive Waste Safely: Literature Review of International
Experiences of Partnership, NDA-RWMD Technical Note 17086, 2007. Available at
www.nda.gov.uk
57
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
13 Acknowledgements
Figures 5.2, 7.4 and 7.7 are reproduced by kind permission of SKB (Svensk
Kärnbränslehantering AB), the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company.
Figure 5.3 is reproduced by kind permission of Nagra (Nationale Genossenschaft für die
Lagerung radioaktiver Abfälle), the Swiss National Cooperative for the Disposal of
Radioactive Waste.
Figures 5.4 and 7.8 are reproduced by kind permission of the United States Department
of Energy (US-DOE).
Figure 5.5 is reproduced by kind permission of DBE (Deutsche Gesellschaft zum Bau und
Betrieb von Endlagern für Abfallstoffe mbH) –Technology, the German Repository
Construction and Operation Organisation.
Figure 7.9 is reproduced by kind permission of Andra (Agence nationale pour la gestion
des déchets radioactifs), the French National Agency for the Disposal of Radioactive
Waste.
58
NDA Report NDA/RWMD/013
14 Annex 1 – List of Bilateral Agreements
Organisations with which the NDA has bilateral agreements and their dates of signing
and duration:
Andra, the French “national agency for the disposal of radioactive waste” regarding very
low level and low level waste disposal, geological disposal, national inventory
development and graphite disposition. (May 2008, 5 years.)
Electricité de France (EDF), through its decommissioning arm CIDEN for
decommissioning strategies, graphite waste disposition, and contaminated land
management. (January 2006, 3 years; extended January 2009.)
DBE Technology, the German repository construction and operation organisation
regarding geological disposal. (October 2009, 5 years.)
Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA), regarding low level waste management, waste
treatment, decommissioning and geological disposal. (July 2008, 5 years.)
Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited (JNFL), regarding low level waste disposal, waste
treatment facilities, decommissioning and public acceptance activities. (Open ended.)
The Nuclear Waste Management Organisation of Japan (NUMO), in respect of
geological disposal. (June 2004, 5 years; extended June 2009.)
The Radioactive Waste Management Funding and Research Centre of Japan
(RWMC), in respect of low, intermediate and high-level waste management, including
geological disposal. (September 2004, 5 years.)
Nagra, the Swiss “national co-operative for the disposal of radioactive waste” for
intermediate and high level waste, and spent fuel disposal. (February 2006, 5 years.)
ONDRAF/NIRAS, the Belgian “agency for radioactive waste and enriched fissile
materials” regarding decommissioning activities, low and intermediate level waste
disposal, and geological disposal. (October 2005, 5 years.)
SKB, the “Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company” for low and
intermediate level waste disposal and geological disposal of spent fuel. (February 2002, 5
years; extended February 2007.)
The United States Department of Energy (USDOE), through its Office of Environmental
Management (EM) in respect of decommissioning and clean-up activities and the Office
of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management regarding geological disposal. (March 2007, 5
years.)
59
Certificate No 4002929
Certificate No 4002929
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
Radioactive Waste Management Directorate
Building 587
Curie Avenue
Harwell Science and Innovation Campus
Didcot
Oxfordshire OX11 0RH
ISBN 978-1-84029-397-5
t +44 (0)1925 802820
f +44 (0)1925 802932
w www.nda.gov.uk
© Nuclear Decommissioning Authority 2010